Mister Spine An interview with Stuart McGill by Marc Demers As a T-mag reader you might be asking yourself, why

should I care about my back? Ill tell you why: How do you plan to get huge and lean for the summer when you're laid up on the couch getting in touch with your "All My Children" side, unable to train thanks to a nasty back injury? If you want to avoid injuries; if you want to learn the myths about stretching the spine and the truth about the lower vs. upper abs question; if you want to know why good-mornings may not be the best thing to do if you want a good morning; if you're sick of insulting nonsense like "keep your back straight when lifting" and want to learn about the back in a more sophisticated way that actually applies to your training, then I suggest you read on and listen to what Stuart McGill has to say. He's going to tell you how a lot of training principles simply don't carry over to the spine and that there's a subtle difference between what builds us up and what tears us down. Stuart McGill is one of the world's best when it comes to understanding the back and spine. In short, he gets bad backs back in business. Youre probably still wondering just who this McGill guy is. Stuart McGill, PhD, is a professor at the University of Waterloo in Ontario, Canada, and an internationally recognized lecturer and expert in spine function and injury prevention and rehabilitation. His labs have produced more than 200 scientific publications that address lumbar function, low back injury mechanisms, mechanisms of injury prevention and rehabilitation and, most recently, issues related to high performance. As a consultant, he has provided expertise on assessment and reduction of the risk of low back injuryalong with rehab approachesto government agencies, corporations, legal firms, professional athletes and teams, and is regularly referred patients for consultation. Put simply, this guy knows his stuff! T-MAG: What motivated you to get your PhD in biomechanics of the spine? Stuart McGill: There was no specific motivation only fate. I was thinking about going to the University of Waterloo to do my PhD in systems-design engineering and happened to meet a professor while playing hockey named Bob Norman, a professor of biomechanics. After getting to know him I decided to switch over to his lab and began my PhD studies under his mentorship. At the time he was asked to be an expert witness for a significant human rights case involving the hiring of women and the risk of back injury, and he asked me to develop some software to compute the loads on peoples backs. At that stage I didnt know the difference between a bad back and a bad front! His advice was to go to the anatomy laboratory to get a sense for the architecture and what I quickly realized was that the structure of the backthe bones, muscles, ligaments was nothing like what was available at the time in biomechanical models. I was beginning to suspect that many of the conclusions from these simplified models were silly at least for understanding how the back works, determining the risk of injury, and for providing evidence for higher performance. So my PhD research focussed on developing methods that would quantify the force distribution in the muscles acting in the backI wanted the most sophisticated and anatomically robust program with a very high degree of biological reality to show me how peoples backs really worked. So, thats how it started; eventually I became a professor, expanded the lab to do spine tissue work, and our team has just kept growing. The final interesting part of the story is that physicians and coaches somehow heard about our work and began sending various personalities from the sports world and the business world to our lab. It became a real eye-opener to see that many of the top athletes were having chronic back troubles because of illchosen training approaches. So I never set out to get a PhD in spine biomechanics. The whole story is just dumb luck really! But looking back I wouldnt trade it for anything. T: As part of your job you get to supervise graduate students. Currently the head MD for the Toronto

Raptors, Dr. Doug Richards, is completing his PhD under your supervision; he must add to your wealth of knowledge, not to mention others you have worked with over the years? SM: Sure, Dr. Richards is a first class physician; he has wonderful insights into both rehab and training for performance, and we learn from each other. Currently my PhD students include a physician, a physical therapist, a chiropractor, a clinical kinesiologist and personal trainer together with some engineering expertise, so it's a fantastic group to coordinate and tackle each issue. And Im very proud of my former students. A lot of them have gone on to be quite influential. I think of Dr. Cholewicki, now a professor at Yales medical school: whom I consider to be the top spine stability scientist in the world. He was an Eastern European classically trained lifter when he came to Canada from Poland, and, I wouldnt be surprised if he still holds a few Canadian records in his weight class. Heres an example of an individual who has been there, knows the issues, and has the academic training to really be authoritative. There are many other former students I would like to brag about (Eyes glaze slightlyhe smiles.) T: When I think of a guy who has his PhD in biomechanics, I think of a pencil-neck who has never seen a barbell in his life and spends all day in the lab playing with rats and numbers. Are you this geek Im thinking of or are you a scientist that actually works with athletes and other "real" people? SM: As you know, in my younger days I played football and loved to work out, but I was typical in that we were never exposed to scientific methods beyond the basic body building approaches. So Ive been there as an uninformed athlete trying to train. Now, every piece of research that we produce must make a contribution! My job as a spine biomechanist is, first: to figure out how the spine works and how people become injured, and second: to use this insight as the evidence base for developing justifiable prevention approaches. The third part is to develop better rehab and performance training. Im here to solve real problems. We roll up our sleeves and try to get to the real issue. T: Did you learn about the back solely through your own and others research, or did you educate yourself by other means? SM: Of course we perform a lot of creative research to try and obtain novel insight. But I have also learned a lot from others. About 15 years ago I started to get invitations to various medical and therapy schools. I met some very influential people like Dr. Vladimir Janda, who taught me a lot on how to assess different kinds of movement disorders and syndromes. There were many, many others too manual clinicians like Dick Erhart and Craig Leibenson, orthopods like Harry Farfan, and some of the athletic gurus like Mel Siff. And in the last few years I have been meeting some of the "strongman" and celebrity athlete personalities at some of the fitness conferences I have spoken at. All were characters and had made valuable contributions, but I didnt always agree with them. At least it gave us a different perspective on things, and hopefully a deeper insight. That really helped in my education because I was exposed to all these different kinds of approaches, not solely thinking as a biomechanist. I dont even know how I would classify myself now! But the important thing was to have frank discussions, sometimes brutal argumentsbut we always went for a beer afterwards. Every time I go to a medical school, university, or clinic, every time I work with an athletic team, I have to admit I learn a lot, even from the people Im supposed to be teaching. I never know when Im the student or the professor. So to answer your question, my real education has come from directing the lab work in combination with my working with other clinicians and scientists, my graduate students, and patients, workers and athletes. Let me give you a final illustrationif you want to find out how to build supreme strength, you will be disappointed reading the scientific literature because it may present a single perspective on some unidimensional issue. But then go and talk to a legend whos done it like Bill Kazmeier who can give you a very eloquent and insightful viewpoint, integrating aspects of technique, training issues, and nutrition. Very few professors would bother to seek out such a fantastic knowledge base so they stay several years behind what the creative minds are putting into practice. The real creativity rarely comes from the PhDs

in this area. I dont have many opinions, do I? (Laughs.) T: Are professional athletic teams and basket-case bad backs regularly referred to you? SM: Yes, Im not a physician or licensed to practice med icine, but as you know people and organizations from all over the world ask me to consult with them. When I give my lectures I show the science and how its applied to real peoplepeople relate to that. Around 15 years ago physicians began to ask me to consult on specific cases and Id be asked to be an expert witness in legal cases involving the back. Slowly, through word of mouth and experience I suppose, I became this consultant. I dont see the average bad back. A lot of times, I am asked to consult on the tricky, difficult-case bad backs; other times it may be a medical management team that would request consultation, or perhaps a player, or a lawyer sometimes they fly them up here or sometimes they fly me out to them. T: What professional teams or sports have you consulted for regularly? SM: First, much of what I do is confidentialyou can imagine an athlete whose worth would be compromised if the world knew they had a bad back. So youll just have to ask aroundI cannot name names. Nor would I say that I consult with them regularly. Im brought in to give an educational session or an update on the latest progress in science or perhaps to help an individual. But you know its funny there are some consultants and gurus in training and athletics who are often quite ahead of the science. Sometimes they have also consulted with the organization alreadybefore I am asked to consult. When I am brought in, I may be able to confirm what they have suspected or blow it out of the water. Sometimes theyre just barking up the wrong tree and may have made suggestions that are detrimental to back health. But a lot of the creativity is from the athletes themselves; they really push the envelope. At that point a back geek like myself may be able to confirm things and enhance some aspects and make them safer and a lot better, producing better results. But I dont consult regularly for any one team; I come in to set up a program and perhaps deliver some education. I like to have a patients care -provider or, in the case of an elite athlete, their strength and conditioning coach attend the consultation, so it also becomes a matter of training their trainer and then I turn it over to them. But part of my role as a professor is to keep monitoring to see how Ive helpedor in some cases failed! T: Most weight-training regiments involve working the joints through a full range of motion. You claim the spine is different. Can you explain this? SM: Yesfrom several perspectives. When you look at the mechanisms of injurylets take for example a herniated diskif a person maintains a neutral spine, as would an Olympic weight lifter for example, its very difficult to create a herniated disk. In contrast, in powerlifting some of the folks repeatedly flex their spine, and repeated full flexion with spinal compression is the mechanism to create a herniated disk. Here is an example of where a muscle physiologist might tell you "Yes, youve got to work the spine through a full range of motion," but if you do it under load you risk replicating the disk herniating mechanism. So the training becomes a damaging routine accumulating microtrauma rather than continuous tissue enhancement and improved performance motor patterning. Another vital fact is that under pure compression loads, and when the spine is fully flexed, weve measured the spine losing up to 40% of its ability to bear compressive loads. In other words the spine is strongest when in a neutral position. Also among the misperceptions that I hear out there about the rectus abdominis, and upper vs. lower abdominals, is that youve got to work the rectus throughout its range of motion. Again these might be muscle physiologists speaking but not people who are cognizant of spinal mechanics. For example, when you look at the architecture of the rectus, its a muscle with four heads, four contractile components each separated by a lateral tendon. If it was a muscle designed to work through its full range of motion it would be one long continuous musclebut its not. It anchors the obliques and transmits the hoop stresses laterally through those lateral

tendons. If it wasnt beaded, the oblique forces would rip it apart laterally. In many elite performances the abdominals contract isometrically. Too many bad backs are created by misinformed people thinking they need to train the rectus with repeated full flexion exercises. There are much better and safer ways to do this. So again if were training athletes to perform, the question is do they need to work the lumbar spine through a full range of motion? Lumbar flexibility often increases the risk of future chronicity! For example, Ive worked with some very good discus throwers and youd think that discus throwing would require a huge amount of twist in someones back. In fact, if you take the twist o ut of the training, stabilize and lock the ribcage onto the pelvis, and twist through the legs and shoulders, you may actually enhance performance. Certainly it may be required to reduce back symptoms. Other performance requirements include variables like speed, agility and/or strength for example; all three of these things require stability, perhaps keeping a line of drive down the torso and through the feet into the ground, etc. A stiffened core may be optimal. So, of course this whole issue depends on the person and the task. But in many cases from both performance and safety perspectives, its a bit of a myth that the spine needs to be trained through its range of motion. T: I think most T-men are not rounding our backs during squats and deadlifts. Howev er, youve said that I should not stretch my back like it would be stretched when I bend over to touch my toes in a hamstring stretch? SM: First, there are many backs that should not be stretched those with discogenic pain may perceive the sensations from stretching muscle spindles asgood, but they will be fooledthe disks may be accumulating trauma to ensure they remain chronic. Second, I would consider that a very unwise way to stretch your hamstrings. A much more clever way to stretch your hamstrings would be to stand upright, put your leg up in front of you on a stool or box and have the spine in a neutral posture while rotating the pelvis to stretch the hamstrings. But be careful and ask the question yourself why you're stretching the hamstrings. You may be compromising knee stability. T: So youre saying that theres not much point in stretching the ligaments of the spine? SM: Again, stretching ligaments in the spine is a myth. If you stretch them to create an increased range of motion, youre going to either tear them or avulse them. You may be building your tolerance to stretch or you may be stretching muscle. But you dont want to stretch ligaments; theyre there for a reason. Theyre there to protect the discs. But dont get me wrong, Im not saying dont warm-up. Also, remember that treating someone for health objectives vs. training them for performance are two different ball-games. We have measured world-class powerlifters, and even though they appear to fully flex their spines, they in fact dont. But at the end of the day Im not saying never flex the spine, either. There is a time and a place. T: "Never" is a powerful word. SM: It is, absolutely! People take me too literally and out of context sometimes because I may be giving a lecture on getting bad backs better which is an entirely different philosophy from training for ultimate performance. Take the issue of breathing: we work very long and hard on establishing breathing patterns where people can still maintain spine stability. So if youre a hockey player, or football player, were training motor patterns overlaying breathing, balance, agility and all those kinds of things. On the other hand, if youre taking a sprinter or powerlifter who does not breathethey may inspire deeply, hold the breath, and bear down and may just sip the air, but no breathing. So we use the word "never," but it is within a specific context. Ultimate performance, and super strength and power as a lifter is an entirely different world of training from training for the NBA, for example or to minimize back pathology so that rigorous training can be resumed.

T: So I guess slouching while sitting during rest periods would be a bad thing? SM: Totally, that would be very detrimental. We first noticed this after doing several experiments showing that the spine becomes weaker if you sit flexed for a while. The tissues creep and have a bit of a set to them and take quite a few minutes to restore their normal biomechanics and proprioceptive functioning even after standing up. So it is not wise to sit slouched prior to a lift and we correlate that to prevention of back disorders in ambulance drivers, for example. Theyre athletes: look what they have to do, sit in a chair slouched and vibrated while driving to the scene where they lift a 300-pound patient out of a bathtub; that is an athletic lift, theres no question. So the prophylactic preparation would be to sit uprighthave a pronounced lumbar support in the ambulance. But for a lifter to sit slouched that would be very detrimental. We showed the unfavorable effects in athletes who sit on the bench and then have to play, particularly the 7 foot NBA players sitting in chairs with their knees in their ears. Thats asking for a back injury, its crazy! T: You also talk about abdominal-bracing during most movements. What do you mean by that exactly? SM: The spine under compressive load will buckle under very low loads and you need muscles to stabilize itbracing does this. People have used the analogy of guide wires on a ships mastits very aptto prevent unstable behavior. You may have heard about transverse abdominus and multifidus as being very important stabilizers of the spine. Im afraid that if thats whats being used to create stability you wont create much stability at all you need all the muscles. Not only will the spine buckle, but it can become unstable in shear. The crisscrossing action of the obliques, for example, anchored on rectus abdominus, means that you have to not only fire up transverse but also the obliques and also rectus. An abdominal brace is where you tense all the abdominal muscles, but you do not suck the navel towards the spine. You can once again use the analogy of the rigging of a ships mastif you move the rigging closer to the mast it actually buckles at a lower load, and if you can move the guide wires out away from the mast you get much more stability. The classic weight lifters like Vasily Alexiev didnt have a nice hollowed abdomenin fact he had enormous stability that came from the distances of those strong guide wires, to give a graphic example. So dont solely focus on multifidus, but Im not saying neglect it either; Im saying think of it with all the other extensors in mind. People dont give credit to muscles like latissimus dorsi, which is very rarely mentioned in spine stability yet supremely important. Every muscle we have is important at some point in time or in some situation. T: I know some practitioners who talk about tummy sucking to activate the transverse; is that a form of bracing? SM: Well it was originally conceived as a form of reprogramming perturbed motor patterns of the transverse abdominus. Whether it actually reprograms transverse is debatable. But its certainly misdirected effort if youre trying to stabilize the spine. You have to do much more than just activate transverse. You need all the muscles, and you do the brace not to suck in but to activate all those muscles to create the brace to protect the spine so it wont buckle or shear in an unstable way. T: I understand you dont like sit-ups in their most popular form. SM: So many athletes come to us with bad backs and I ask them about their current routine, and they might tell me, "Well, I do 100 sit-ups first thing in the morning." Sit-ups cause far too much spine load for the associated muscle challenge that is created, so the trick is to find an appropriate muscle challenge level thats appropriate for that particular athlete. You probably want the spine in a neutral posture, but sit-ups involve full spine flexion, which is a problem for many people as well, so in this case we do a modified curl-up to achieve the same if not more co-contraction of the abdominals, obliques and rectus. We ab brace first, elbows off the floor, good neck

pattern, then curl-up against the brace just a little bit, not rising very much; then overlay deep breathing patterns. An incredible ab workout that spares the spine. It also creates motor patterns that you can use in real life, whether youre playing football, powerlifting, sprinting, or whatever it is youre doing to ensure spine stability, and a large ability to buttress shearing and bending loads, and breathe functionally, etc. T: What if muscle hypertrophy is the goal? Will isometric contractions facilitate this? Assuming my body-fat percentage is low enough to reveal a six-pack, Im concerned with the visual impact of my abdominals in addition to their functional capabilities. Is there much room for hypertrophy to take place or are we limited in the extent to which we can get our abs to grow? SM: Im not worried about that, Marc, six-packs are for beer and I prefer two-fours! (Laughs.) But really thats not my world. If you want to hypertrophy those muscles there are much better experts than I. But if you want to perform and enhance health, you have my attention. I dont think bodybuilders and people worried about aesthetics want big bulky obliques. How much you can hypertrophy the obliques is another question; certainly with rectus you can "look ripped" if thats what you want to do. I can design one hell of an abdominal workout without doing any sit-ups. First you have to dispel the myth about upper and lower rectus, but there are absolutely neuro-muscular compartments in the obliques anterior, upper, lower, medial, posterior and you have to do many different things to train them effectively. A simple sit-up with a twist is not going to cut it. So, Im thinking more about function.

Part 2 of this interview will adress the proper elements of ab training, how to brace for heavy lifts, and common mistake made by trainers and trainees alike. Look for it in the next issue of T-mag.

T: Youre saying that theres no way to work the lower -abs vs. the upper-abs, which is very contradictory to conventional wisdom. Can you expand on this? SM: To be clear, Im only talking about the rectus abdominus. There have been several problems in the scientific literature leading to misinterpretation. Theres a muscle called pyramidalius, which is a lower muscle that overlays the bottom beads of rectus, but only in some peopleits an optional muscle. Those using EMG (electromyography) who claim there is an upper and lower rectus might be monitoring pyramidalius, but if you control with calibrated and normalized EMG our work shows that all four beads of rectus pretty much fire together within the noise and randomness of the signal. On the other hand there are absolutely regional differences in the obliques. You need several types of challenges to train all of the neuromuscular compartments of the obliques. T: You said you train athletes to breathe while isometrically contracting their abdominals in various exercises. Why do you do this? SM: In real life tasks you dont exhale during the concentric exertion phase and inhale with the lowering eccentric phase. But this is often recommended by the personal trainers in gyms! Real life may mean posting up against Shaq in the NBA while the athlete is breathing hard or perhaps your mom needs to be prepared for just stepping off an unseen curb. So we have all kinds of tricks to teach different people

stabilizing patterns in these muscleswhile theyre challenged while breathing and/or while theyre pushing a weight up, lowering it, etc. Generally you dont want to entrain breathing to the exertion BUT theres always an exception. Does it apply to a powerlifter? No. If youre going for a record lift and you hold your breath but then let it out, youre in big trouble. For Olympic lifts we would train or allow the athlete to sip the air (but with minimal air flow) during the standing-stabilization phase that follows the clean; this prepares the athlete to maximize the elastic contributions preceding the jerk. So its all part of maximizing elastic recoil, potentiating muscle, ensuring sufficient stability within the spinethere is so much technique involved. For ultimate performance without injury the athlete has to get it all right. But thats a whole different world from training a basketball or football player. I also find the taller the athlete, the more difficulty they have learning to breathe and keeping a stable spine after a back injury. The same muscles are used for both. The abdominals, quadratus, latissimus, and extensors are needed for spine stability, yet the abdominal wall is heavily recruited during heavy challenged breathing. In this way, healthy breathing mechanics are essential for a stable spine. Generally, the training begins with challenged breathing while developing the patterns in the diaphragm to do the ventilation work so that full efficiency of the abdominals are directed towards stability, and transferring power from the arms and shoulders down to the ground with minimal energy losses through the trunk, keeping the line of drive within the dynamic base of support, etc. We would have to get into a specific situation to really discuss optimal abdominal integration. T: Youre saying I can be safe if I can maintain a neutral spine posture while bracing during the lifting movement? SM: No, Im not going to go therethe issue of safety is a relative one. We can discuss more safe vs. less safe, but then we are into the legal argument of nominal risk. I dont want to get into my expert legal witness routine now! T: But in general, if I brace while doing things in the gym SM: Well, again I would have to see the exercises and understand your training or exercise goals and then examine you to pre-qualify you as a person who should even be training in a specific way; but generally, bracing with a neutral spine lessens the risk. Lets go over a few mechanisms of injury: herniated disks require repeated full-flexion; fracture of a vertebral endplate will occur if your lumbar spine is flexed at about 25-40% less load than if it is in a neutral posture. If you arent at the end range of motion the ligaments arent stretched, so you cant strain or tear them. In terms of stability, the lumbar spine will buckle with about 20 pounds of compressive load, so it needs the guide wire system provided by the

muscles. So there you have four different spine-damaging mechanisms for which a neutral spine that is muscularly braced can lessen the risk of injury. T: But that doesnt ensure that we wont get injured. SM: Thats right. I need to see so much more of the training and technique, things like speed, or are they balancing the bar properly? Those sorts of things. Then I need to understand personal attributes their previous injury history, their joint mobility, their balance within muscle pairs and groups. Their motor/motion patterns are criticalmaybe they are not at the stage where I would qualify them to even be lifting a heavy barand this is not uncommon. Without appropriate motion/motor patterns the risk of injury is too high. I can think of a recent case where the athlete prepared by laying on his back and pushing a weight up a sled with their legsa form of leg press. I dont know why anyone would want to train this motor pattern in the first place, we get so much more for the same amount of training effort doing one-leg squats for example, and youre far better off from a performance point of view and much safer, too. The trick is to wisely choose the most appropriate challenge with minimal risk of injurybut not zero risk. In fact, that is the philosophical difference between the way we train athletes and our approach to designing back rehab programs. Training has some risk, back rehab must cause no pain under our approaches or the technique is incorrect. Pain inhibits the development of optimal motor patterns. T: What would you consider the most painful sight at the gym? SM: The most painful sight I guess in the gym is watching egos create situations where the body gets damaged. When I walk into a gym where no one knows who I amit may be a college football or basketball team training and I see terrible technique with far too much weight, I know that person is headed for injury. I may offer a suggestion and they say, "Well, who the hell are you?" Ive learned to just walk away but it breaks my heart to see so much potential being stupidly destroyed. I hate arguments like whats the perfect arm curlthats stupidespecially when youve got guys doing this in the NFL. And believe me, they do. Isolating the elbow may be relevant for bodybuilding, but it has no place in creating a strong man. T: What about strength coaches and personal trainers, what kind of mistakes do you see them make that sends shivers up your spine? SM: Most people come to see me because of the poor advice theyre given from their strength and conditioning professional. So I dont see the success storiesonly the failures. For example, many trainers try and rehab bad backs with strength routines. But if the motion/motor patterns are perturbed or

poor, strength training without this foundation will ensure the athlete remains chronic. The proper motor/motion patterns need to be regrooved first, followed by some endurance development and then finally strength, power agility, etc. Another thing we do is provocative testing to observe the mechanical motion, motor patterns and loads that cause pain and try to take that out of their training repertoire or their task or whatever else they have to do. This really contrasts those gurus who use "if you cant then you must" training approaches. We say if it causes pain there is a reason, and we deal with the underlying disorder first. And I dont believe in the work hardening approach as a rule. There is a fine line between what builds someone up verses what tears them down. And if they are not progressing, something needs to be changedit may even mean making the exercises less challenging. So Im an arrogant son of a gun sometimes, but I have to admit that Im not always right either! T: You said that strength coaches may be exacerbating current injuries in athletes. Can you expound on this? SM: They come from so many different philosophies, some come from a bodybuilding background, or powerlifting, or Olympic weightlifting, etc. Some are very cognizant of healthy motion/motor patterns and will work on technique longer before they start building strength, agility, and speed. Others just come from building speedyou cant just do that either. You must address their motion/motor patterns first. There are some wonderful strength and conditioning coaches that understand the notion of motion and motor patterns that have been around for years, but they are not so common in North America. This awareness of motion and motor patterns has certainly been in the Soviet and Eastern European culture for a while. So it all depends on who the coach is and what the athletes are presented with, it depends on the sport, it depends on the athlete, it depends, it depends, it depends You see some trainers who are incredibly innovative people. There are also high profile trainers many are quoted in this magazinewho dont do any research themselves but read and put things together in a way thats consumable. This is fine and we need people to do this. But its just that sometimes they dont realize the consequences of some of the things theyre advocating. Some of the things they recommend are not the wisest for many. Many dont have a very clear understanding of how the back works. But at the end of the day some are very wise, innovative, and clever. T: You also talk about our increased risk in the morning hours after waking. Can you explain this?

SM: As you know, youre taller when you wake up in the morning than when you go to bed at night. This is because the discs are hydrophilic, that means they suck up water while you sleep and when there are no stresses present. After rising, hydrostatic stresses of just walking around and using the muscles during the day compress your spine and the fluid is squeezed out, decreasing the anular tensions in the disc. So, when you wake up the extra height in the discs are analogous to a full water balloon ready to burst and if you bend, you build up much higher stresses in the disc. In fact, the stresses are three times higher than when you perform the same bend two or three hours later. Now Im not talking about getting up and going for a walk or perhaps a boxer going for a jog first thing in the morning. Im talking about heavy bending exercises, like for example the good -morning exercise or doing sit-ups. Somehow people thought that this would be a good thing to do in the morning. Its the worst possible thing you could do for the back first thing in the morning. I personally have a more favorite morning exercise, its what I like to call a "great-morning," but I dont think my wife would appreciate me talking about it! Full spine bending first thing in the morning is a great way to damage your backan unwise thing to do. T: But what if Ive got 3 kids and work 50 hours a week and the only time I have to work out is in the morning about 45 minutes after waking? SM: Having said all that Marc, never say never! For some people theyll never have a back problem. Theyre lucky. But if you have a bit of a ticklish back and you have to be careful with it, then be aware of what youre doing first thing in the morning. Again, I cant give you a program that will work with everybody, I cant even give you instructions that will work with everybody or work with a team. Eevery athlete, every person is an individual. Some people can tolerate this first thing in the morning, but many bad backs who come to see me and thats why theyre comingcant. I have to test them to figure out what precisely is exacerbating their bad back and then remove that from their routines. If that happens to be not bending first thing in the morning, and thats a very common one, then thats what you have to do. Other people can take all kinds of abuse to their back but then its their knees or shoulders you have to protect. But whats the number one injury that people are concerned with? Its their back. T: Ive read your new book, Low Back Disorders: Evidence-Based Prevention and Rehabilitation. Some of the issues you cover are rather complexwho would you say would benefit from your book?

SM: Well, its interesting. Some lay people have read it and said its rocked their world in terms of what they do with their personal routines. Ive read a few of the reviews on Amazons web site and one guy whos had a bad back for 30 years said it has changed his life. The book isnt for the average person. After all, who wants to be average? People who have a fondness for mechanics and are adamant about understanding their body and are tired of people telling them the simple things that are almost insulting like, "When you lift, bend the knees and keep the back straight," will appreciate the book. Very rarely does this kind of advice actually help. So if you want to go above and beyond kindergarten level advice than you might be interested in the book. But certainly I wrote it for rehabilitation professionals. My next book is going to be on performance. T: When do you expect that to be published? SM: I cant say for sure but I have my next sabbatical in three years and hope to do it then at the very latest. T: Considering the T-man, what would you say are the key points that we should consider when training to stay injury-free, strong, and looking good? SM: Again, I need to know what type of training youre doing. If youre training for performance were going to do some very interesting things. For example, when you look at some of the old Soviet lifters that were very successful, some of them never lifted competitive loads in training. They trained at very high rates of speed in a balanced environment with perfect technique. If thats where you want to head with this you may have to completely change your current paradigm. I need to know what the specific objectives of the individual are before I can answer your question. When you examine the science, quite often you realize that a lot of what you hear is mythology. This is not simple stuff so the top T-man will learn how the spine and the rest of the body works so they become their own best expert. T: How about any general wisdom you would like to share with us? SM: Never get married to a single philosophy. As soon as you know it all, shake your head because you are probably missing something. The spine is a difficult beast. A lot of general principles dont carry over to the spine. Listen to all kinds of different people, dont throw away all of the things youve learned over the years and follow one guru: there is no single fitness god! And if you find someone that says theyve found all the answers, be wary. Its nice to hear the experts say they dont know.

Supremely important for the T-man is to listen to your own body. Again, there is a subtle difference between what is building people up, versus what is tearing them down. Work is good, but not too much and not too little either. You know when I look at some of the Westside training philosophies with the use of labile weights, using chains and using elastics with their squat racks/routines, thats a whole new wonderfully innovative world. But then again some of the routines produce high reverse shear loads. Great for some, not so good for others. The T-man has to have an independent mind, an open mind, and the confidence to be a skeptic. Theres a time and place for virtually anything; again, it depends, it depends, it depends T: Thanks for spending the time to chat with us Stu. SM: My pleasure Marc. Keep up the great

An Interview with Dr. Stuart McGill, Part I by Chad Waterbury 3/08/2012 Next Page | Pages 1 2

I'm not a betting man, but I'd put money down that you've heard of Dr. Stuart McGill. Whether you're a professional athlete or someone who just wants a stronger core, you probably know of him. And if by some chance you haven't heard his name, I guarantee that many of the core exercises you're currently doing have been influenced by him. In 2002, McGill released his landmark text Low Back Disorders: Evidence-Based Prevention and Rehabilitation and it changed the way coaches, bodybuilders, athletes, and non-athletes approach core training. With his books, articles, seminars, and more than 30 years of clinical research with everyone from elite athletes to disabled workers, Dr. McGill established himself as the premier voice for core development.

But like anyone who achieves a high level of power and influence, eventually your name can end up on a hit list. Over the last few years there's been a trend to turn away from, even blatantly criticize, what Dr. McGill tried to teach us.

On one hand, science is about critical thinking, so questioning his methods is healthy and necessary. It's the only way to intelligently initiate progress. On the other hand, his message often gets watered-down and words get put into his mouth.

One notion about Dr. McGill is that he's "anti-flexion" with regard to the spine. Critics like to say that McGill overly emphasizes the plank and avoids any spinal flexion exercise because it will inevitably torpedo your intervertebral discs across the room and splatter them onto the wall like a Jackson Pollock painting.

Okay, maybe not that extreme.

But one thing's for certain: McGill is the latest victim of the straw man technique. If you're going to argue with a professor who has over 300 peer-reviewed publications, you better bring your A-game.

Having known Dr. McGill for years, and being one of the fortunate trainers who's worked next to him, it was always tough for me to hear these criticisms because they were usually based on things I was pretty certain he wouldn't say. Sure, he might agree that some statements could apply to certain populations under certain conditions, but many other accusations were just plain wrong.

That's why I was relieved when McGill said he wanted get some things off his chest. I could tell the typically mild-mannered doc was a bit aggravated by all the Internet chatter. He's spent his life testing, experimenting, and collecting data in order to help us train smarter. But his principles got lost in a sea of misinterpretations.

So with any luck, this interview will clear the air and re-establish Dr. Stuart McGill's true message. Then you can make an intelligent decision and determine if his approach is right for you or your clients.

Chad Waterbury: Okay Stu, I'm going to get right to the hot-button issue: spinal flexion. You and your research team have been branded as the scientists who are anti-flexion. What's your take on that? Dr. Stuart McGill: Chad, thanks for this opportunity. People hear sound bites when I'm asked about a specific situation and then they generalize. I usually have flexion motion in every program and this will surprise those people who are misinformed about our work.

With the cat-camel motion on all fours, we've proven it to be the best way to take the spine through the range without load. This preserves the ability to do daily tasks that often flex the spine, such as tying your shoes. The cat-camel helps floss neural tissues and keeps them healthy. Also, that exercise helps align collagen during the healing process. It's appropriate for most painful backs.

CW: Now, in order to delve deeply into this topic it's important to define what flexion really means. Surprisingly, it can relate to different mechanisms of action. Let's start with that difference. SM: First, there's flexion movement which is the kinematic variable, the act of flexing the spine, such as seen with a full crunch. This is often confused with the kinetic variable of creating flexion moment, which is the challenge that requires abdominal muscle to create force and support the flexion movement. Flexion moment may be generated whether or not there's spine motion. To exclude flexion moment training for a flexion movement-intolerant person is a poor strategy and creates unnecessarily weak people. CW: Speaking of people who aren't weak, strongmen and powerlifters sometimes round their back while pulling a max deadlift. So this leads people to think that it's acceptable to lose the inward lumbar curvature since some of those strongmen don't get debilitating back injuries. SM: First, let me explain a concept. Spine power results from force multiplied by velocity. To mitigate risk, spine power must be low. If the load is high, then velocity, or spine movement, must be low. Similarly, high velocity movement must be accompanied by low force. With these powerlifters, the load is high, the spine is partially flexed forward but not 100% flexed and locked in this flexed posture. Since there's no velocity, the spinal discs are more resilient to herniation than if movement occurred. Thus, there's no flexion motion but there's flexion moment. So some competent deadlifters who rotate and extend around the hips instead of the spine reduce the risk. CW: Nevertheless, a guy who pulls a big deadlift could reduce his risk of injury if he maintained a more neutral spine. Correct?

SM: Yes, but it's a game of tradeoffs. Having a shorter leg-to-torso length ratio with shallow hip sockets will allow a more neutral spine. This reduces lumbar joint compression and shear loads but requires more hip-extensor strength.

A flexed spine uses less hip strength but increases the hydraulic pressure on the posterior part of the disc. This increases collagen delamination and the risk of a bulging disc. So if a person lifts with a flexed spine, what they do for the rest of the day matters even more. For example, incorporating full motion crunches for this heavy lifting athlete would be a mistake.

The concept of cumulative loading would need greater consideration. In other words, lifting with a neutral spine increases the tolerable training volume. That alone is a real gift to many lifters and particularly athletes who use the deadlift as part of a larger training program.

CW: Let's clarify what you mean by delaminating collagen. In layman's terms this means a weakening of the disc structure. SM: Disc collagen delaminates mostly from motion, but this weakening is accelerated under higher loads. Specifically, the fibers split apart allowing the nucleus to flow through. Therefore, locking the spine so no motion occurs until the end of the lockout is helpful. But this distinction only holds true with no prior cumulative delamination. Usually there will come a point when accumulated delamination, or a further weakening of the disc, will allow the nucleus to travel through the annulus. Then the person will experience " flexion motion with load intolerance." Once this stage happens, deadlifting will cause debilitating pain.

Now for a paradox: If a guy has a long history of lifting with some flexion, the trabecular bone in the vertebral body will be strongly adapted. It appears as though stronger and denser trabecular bone reduces vertebral end plate damage and the ensuing delamination process. This characterizes the grand old men of powerlifting who have survived years of lifting with a flexed spine.

But a newer lifter has a higher risk since they don't have years of loading history to create the adaptation. But the loading is needed to stimulate the adaptation, and this is the most perilous time. Some will survive, but others will have the legacy of a problematic back.

CW: Now the guy has a nagging injury. SM: Unfortunately, yes. Following this injury he will have to preserve a neutral spine even when he's lifting light. CW: Sounds like a terrible way to convince a guy to deadlift or squat with proper technique. And this is why you always have to consider the risk versus reward relationship. Most guys can pull more weight if

they round the spine, but it's extremely risky. The slightest extra move during flexion movement action could be debilitating.

Let's talk about bone for a minute. Trabeculae are thin plates and struts of calcified tissue in the innermost layer of bone. Research suggests that increased loading, such as with heavy weight training, can increase bone density by up-regulating trabeculae.

So the vertebrae in a heavy squatter are much stronger than in a non-lifter because he has more dense trabeculae inside the vertebrae. Not only does trabeculae make your bones stronger, but it also serves to maintain the joint shape that's critical for optimal distribution of the load.

Since most T Nation readers have years of heavy lifting under their belt, and their bones are much stronger, are they less susceptible to disc injuries caused by lifting heavy loads?

SM: Yes and no. The type of back injury depends on the size of the load and number of bending cycles. Under high compressive loads the trabecular bone within the vertebrae is what regulates the load bearing strength.

Fortunately, it's fatigable and adaptable, just like muscle tissue. As the nucleus pressurizes, it creates a doming effect on the endplate down into the vertebrae, and the trabecular bone is what backs it up. So progressive training over the years lays down bone that's heavily adapted to bear mammoth-compressive load.

CW: Okay, so heavy lifting strengthens the bone in your spine to deal with more heavy load compression. Does this increased bone strength make people less susceptible to the risk associated with low load flexion exercises such as a full crunch? SM: Here's the "no" part of the answer. The story changes with lower loads and repeated bending. The heavy-boned spines adapted for lifting don't protect against bending. When the compressive load is lower, multiple bending causes a weakening effect.

Here's an analogy: if you bend a wire coat hanger back and forth it eventually breaks due to metal fatigue. In the spine, the matrix binding the disc collagen fibers together will fatigue and delaminations occur. The nucleus starts to work itself through these breached delaminations with repeated bends. My research team was the first to quantify this back in 2007.

CW: Stu, there's some controversy with regard to maintaining lordosis while in the deepest squat position. Some say it's acceptable and not harmful to allow the pelvis to posteriorly rotate in the hole, thus allowing

the athlete to squat deeper. I don't allow any loss of inward lumbar curvature with my athletes based on what you've taught me. What risks are associated with this posterior pelvic tilt at the bottom of a full squat? SM: I see too many ruined backs from those who believed they were immune from spine flexion during the deep squat or clean, including some of the trainers and coaches themselves. A few lucky ones are. It's unfortunate how many former athletes tell me they wish they listened earlier and made wiser choices.

Exercises are tools to get specific jobs done. The way an exercise is performed depends on the rationale for choosing that exercise. First, list the objective and then decide on the best tool. Usually the best exercise is the one that creates the largest effect with the minimal risk to the joints. If the purpose is to create hip extension power, then exercises such as weighted carries and sled drags have to be considered.

For bodybuilders wanting to develop the gluteal muscles, they'll need to address the two major neuromuscular compartments in the glutes. The high lateral glute is developed with loaded carries or with most one-legged resistive squat exercises. The low posterior glute is mainly challenged in the bottom half of the squat.

This is where the choice regarding depth and spine flexion needs to be made. Depending on the person's injury history, what they do during the rest of the day, their hip joint anatomy, the other exercises in their program, and specific exercise form, they'll need to choose how deep to squat.

In my consults with some college football programs I've found about one-third of the players have back difficulties by failing to make good decisions regarding squat and power clean form and depth. Those one-third have their athleticism compromised by back pain.

Of course, the safest choice over the long term is to not go deeper than the break point of where the neutral spine is lost.

CW: I agree. If an athlete wants to train the thigh musculature through a greater range of motion, single leg exercises should be incorporated into the program.

Moving on, I know it's not exciting to talk about genetics since they're factors we can't control. However, genetics do play an important role in this argument for or against repeated spinal flexion, correct?

SM: We've discovered that the shape of the disc determines its resilience to the number of bends it can survive with minimal collagen delamination.

For example, while an oval-shaped disc with a smaller radius is better suited for twisting actions, it's poorer at repeated compressive loading. On the other hand, a limacon-shaped disc is better suited to bear high compression but it succumbs to focal stresses at the back of the limacon with repeated bending. This is exactly what's seen clinically.

Slender spines that can twist well win golf tournaments, but those slender spines don't survive playing linebacker in the NFL. Then again, I don't know of any linebacker who can hit a golf ball far. Each spine is suited to withstand a unique stress and fail under another.

CW: So what about the people that didn't choose the right parents? They have a damaged disc that's causing pain, a loss of strength, and an inability to train with optimal intensity. Can we say the problem is delamination? If so, how long does that type of injury take to heal? SM: The problem might be delamination or it could be an end plate fracture. It depends on the type of damaging load. Assuming it's delamination, that type of injury doesn't heal quickly far from it. It takes about 10 years, on average, for collagen gristling to take place.

So just because a guy is without pain doesn't mean complete healing has occurred. Restoring the former strength and tissue toughness happens with long bones, but it doesn't happen with collagen.

Furthermore, the mechanics of the joint have been disrupted and this will generally cause more load on the facet joints. They will become arthritic within a few years. This arthritic cascade is accelerated by more motion and the spine will never be the same.

CW: If someone has an injury, what steps do you typically take in your lab/clinic to correct it?

SM: First, back injury is not a life sentence, but it needs to be cleverly managed. We can usually link the mechanical cause to the tissue damage. Radially delaminated layers or annular tears are created from a twisting injury. Focal disc herniations are usually caused by flexion bending, and end plate fractures are from compressive overload.

First we examine the patient's sport training, their movement patterns, and lifestyle to find the injury or pain mechanism. Then we confirm the mechanism with provocative testing to replicate the pain using combinations of motions, posture, and loads. Next we quantify the combinations that cause pain and those that don't. Then we create the rehab program to remove the pain. Finally, the program morphs into a performance-enhancement training program that bears in mind the original mechanism.

CW: Excellent, Stu. That's essential information for any physical therapist or corrective exercise trainer. Speaking of twisting injuries, there seems to be some debate on your position regarding dynamic rotational core training. Care to elaborate? SM: Injuries form clusters that help reveal the cause. If a baseball team has more than one stress fracture, I look immediately at the strength and conditioning program. There you'll find the cause poor exercise choice and programming.

Usually, there will be loaded twisting rotation at excessive speed. I consulted for an Olympic sprint squad from one country that was compromised because of lateral medicine ball throws into a wall. These athletes were rotating around the lumbar spine, which either delaminated the layers of the annulus or

caused stress fractures in the pars. It was the fault of the trainer/coach who didn't know better, and the importance of technique when recommending a power exercise.

What they needed was better training techniques to reduce the spine motion and emphasize hip drive. This is a very important point: I notice which teams have specific injury patterns when other teams that play the same sport do not.

CW: So how do you recommend that T Nation readers train core rotation? SM: I begin by quantifying the demands of the sport, and then the capabilities of the athlete. I design a training program to address any deficiencies between the two. Therefore, each program is different. CW: Yes, that's the risk we take whenever we recommend an exercise. What might be ideal for one guy could be problematic for another. But throw us a bone and give us some recommendations. SM: Okay, here are some examples. I might begin with shadow boxing to enhance the timing of muscular pulses to stiffen the core to enhance shoulder and hip explosive power. Then I might build some endurance with standing cable single-arm pushes and pulls, emphasizing core stiffness and crisp deliberate shoulder pulses.

In order to build more strength, I might use a modified bench press with the right side of the body on a bench and the left side suspended. This requires intense gluteal muscle drive as the heavy dumbbell is driven up in the left hand. This technique is also performed with the left side on the bench while you press with the right arm.

SM: Then I might consider landmines with an Olympic bar. SM: Now if we're talking about a golfer who needs more rotational velocity, I would start with the hips, probably prescribing hip airplanes. Then I'd ensure torso pulse generation is timed with the hips.

Don't miss part II of the interview with Dr. McGill where he talks about core training for MMA athletes, what he thinks about the concept of doing a thousand sit-ups every day, and much more!

In part I of my interview with performance and spine expert, Dr. Stuart McGill, we covered a lot of ground. Dr. McGill is mostly known for his approach to "core training," but that term probably doesn't mean what you think it does. When you implement the training techniques that Dr. McGill covers in these interviews your entire body will become stronger and more explosive, not just your abs.

With that in mind, let's get back to the discussion and you'll understand why Dr. McGill is one of the most sought after performance experts across the globe.

Chad Waterbury: Stu, the last time we met up for beers you asked me where I think the core is. I told you that I consider it everything from your head down to your toes. You seemed pleased with that answer. Or maybe it was just the lager talking? Care to elaborate? Dr. Stuart McGill: To me the definition is context specific. Take the example of a MMA fighter and measure the biomechanics of hitting hard at the instant the fist or shin contacts the opponent the whole body is stiffened with a pulse. This creates "effective mass" and results in the opponent being hit with the full mass of the striker. The entire body can be considered the stiffened core.

Contrast this with a standing one-arm press. It doesn't matter how much one can bench press because when standing you can only create a push force with a magnitude of half your body weight. Furthermore, the force development is limited by the ability of their torso and abdominal musculature to prevent twisting motion. Here I think the concept of the core would be more focused.

CW: In the first part of this interview you gave us a progression of core exercises that have no, or relatively low, rotational velocity. However, some sports such as golf mandate that movement pattern, even if it's high risk. Once a guy has worked through the progression, which exercise do you recommend to train higher rotational velocity? SM: If we're talking about a golfer who needs more rotational velocity, I would probably start with the hip airplane. Great golfers are relatively relaxed through the downswing since muscularly generated force also adds stiffness, which slows motion. At ball contact the great ones create a pulse of muscular force throughout the linkage. This originates about the rear hip in external rotation. The "hip airplane" mimics this force.

Then I would progress to training a faster rate of relaxing the muscles to ensure the maintenance of speed in the follow through. I would avoid slow strength training for a golfer.

CW: You mentioned your work with MMA fighters. Those guys can benefit from exercises that develop rotational strength. Some of the coolest and most effective core exercises you've taught me are the ones I use with fighters. SM: I must say I have had a lot of fun working with some of the great ones lots of stories there. For example, one exercise I developed specifically for Georges St. Pierre was the slamball helicopter exercise. I wanted to create mammoth torsional endurance to control opponents in the clinch, but also enhance ability for explosive pulses for Muay Thai knees and those nasty inside uppercuts and body rips.

Of course, when training the isometric core endurance the challenge was to train the very brief relaxation necessary for speed to execute "dirty boxing." That's where the pulsing idea came from. As the ball passes 12 o'clock, a pulse is generated, then 6 o'clock, 3, o'clock, 9 o'clock, etc. It really challenges the neurology

for speed-strength and endurance. The duty cycle is 5 minutes on, 1 minute off. Now try that for 3 or 5 rounds. It's easy on the back but brutal for the torsional musculature.

CW: Let's talk about sit-ups. Stu, there are so many guys I know that just can't get enough of them. I honestly believe that we have the Rocky movies to blame for them being so ubiquitous. Your book Low Back Disorders was one of the first clinical-based texts that taught us sit-ups aren't very good for our discs. Your lab determined one of the primary reasons and it's due to the high compressive forces they induce, on the order of 3400N or 764 pounds. Tell us more about that. SM: The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) sets exposure limits for substances that are known to compromise the health of the American worker. Along with obvious limits for things like poisons, radiation exposure, etc., they've found values for low back compression that lead to elevated rates of disabling back disorders.

The NIOSH have sponsored research that surveyed workers, and their data show that when lumbar loads exceed 3400N, the injury rates go up and interventions are recommended. The problem is that these are for average workers. Who's average?

Now, the sit-up recruits torso and hip muscles that impose compressive load on the spine for the average male of about 3400N. Performing sit-ups uses some training capacity compression plus repeated bending to achieve training of the torso and hip flexors. But remember that this combination of load and motion is a potent cause of annulus collagen delamination.

If I could give you a better tool to train the flexion muscles that preserves training capacity by sparing the most vulnerable tissues, you could then increase your tolerable training volume. This would be a great advance, of course. Consider the stir the pot exercise.

So even though sit-ups train the abdominals, psoas, and rectus femoris, the stir the pot exercise places the spine in a more resilient posture so you can really train these muscles hard. CW: Some guys have said they listened to you and dropped doing flexion training and they became weak because of it. So they returned to doing sit-ups. What do you say? SM: I think that they have little expertise and poor knowledge. Perhaps they're confused with the difference between flexion motion and flexion moment. In any case, flexion moment must be trained. Take the military, where speed sit-ups still form a component of the fitness test, if for no other reason than sit-ups are easy to keep score.

A good study proved that performing flexion moment challenges such as the plank actually enhanced situp performance in soldiers. But the problem with the military is that the soldiers train the test, and this a major reason for the number of disabled backs that are returning from tours of duty overseas. But this

practice is under review, thankfully. Nonetheless, one must still train torso flexion moment but avoid the repeated movement with speed and load.

CW: I know athletes that like to perform the sit-up slowly because they really feel the burn in their abs. I have a gut feeling they think that slow movements are safer for their spine, too. However, I can't see how slow sit-ups would benefit an explosive athlete. SM: You're right, sit-ups and slow flexion will not get you to the Olympic 100 meter final. They're not ideal for MMA fighters or NFL linebackers, either. Explosive hip flexion is required. In my lab we have a program of explosive hip flexion training with the torso locked stiff. This achieves proximal stiffness in the torso so that the full muscle force drives thigh velocity rather than the spine bending. Furthermore, the spine

CW: Since sit-ups aren't ideal for sprinters, fighters, linebackers, or explosive athletes in general, what do you recommend they do?

SM: For MMA fighters, the first order of business is to create abdominal armor for their organs to survive impact. The stir the pot exercise allows brutal training without robbing training capacity from the spine. Overhead cable pulls with motion at the hips is another strength building example. Sprints and hurdles, when combined with neural training, increase the rate of muscle activation, and most importantly, the rate of relaxation. I call this twitch training. Of course, MMA athletes need to lift and throw and they need to strike with huge proximal stiffness and distal limb compliance, among other abilities. Technique may need to change if they have a history of spine flexion intolerance. Furthermore, they may train challenging flexion moment without actually flexing the spine. More hip mobility will help. The McGill modified curl-up with a neutral spine perhaps supported and barely raising the head and shoulders may be appropriate with a progression into explosive shoulder and hip flexion. CW: Before we move on from this sit-up topic, I've got to ask you one more question. What do you think of the notion that it might be acceptable to do a thousand sit-ups or crunches every day because some guys can pull that off without any problems? SM: First one must consider injury mechanisms from sit-ups or spinal flexion in general. Herniations and disc bulges result from repeatedly bending the spine.

For example, in a sit-up with the corresponding compressive load will eventually pump the nucleus through the annulus and bulge. If the compressive load is less, and there is no history of this process, then bending might not cause this process.

However, the argument that someone has done sit-ups their whole life and are fine so everyone should do them lacks logic and understanding they've adapted, or they have slender spines that withstand bending, or they do not train heavy.

But here's another paradox: we all know the soft person with poor fitness who can sit with impunity and has no back pain. Yet the fit person sits at a computer and becomes pained. Bulging discs usually start with a compressive or torsional injury. Damage to the underlying trabecular bone allows the delamination process to speed up so that the flexed posture associated with sitting then causes pain.

The fit person has built up cumulative loading and bending with a few episodes of overloading the joint, while the unfit person did not. It would be very rare to find a person who can tolerate thousands of sit-ups yet has trained with substantial lifting. But those are the freaks of nature at the far end of the biological spectrum. The take home message is that if a person is lifting heavy, do not add sit-ups choose one or the other as these two do not mix.

A final thought: If someone sits at work all day in static flexion, and then has a training session that has numerous flexion bends with moderate compressive load, sit-ups are ill advised. Did I say "no flexion?" Of course not. I said expertise is required to make the best decision to design flexion motion and flexion moment exercises.

CW: Okay, let's move on. You talk a lot about stiffening the spine during explosive actions. Can you explain what you mean? SM: Yes, stiffening the spine will allow more explosive athleticism from the ball and socket joints of the hips and shoulders. Proximal stiffness facilitates distal explosive ability. Sprinters typically have explosive hips and sprinting is a terrific exercise, but those that succumb to a disabled back usually are not locking the pelvis and spine together when training explosive hip flexion power. CW: You consult with enough professional athletes to make a person's head spin, especially the NFL where disc problems are rampant. What's the most common training problem you see with their training?

SM: The most common deficit of the NFL lineman I see in terms of training is their lifting form. They lose the natural lumbar curve at the bottom of the lift. Pulling from blocks helps in this regard.

Another common physical deficit is lack of lateral torso strength. This imbalance shows when the player plants a foot for a high speed cut, and the pelvis drops on the swing leg side as the spine slightly bends laterally. This is an energy leak that causes a loss in quickness and often results in instant pain. This is from an imbalance in training.

Typically these players over-emphasize the two legged lifts and pulls like squats and power cleans without considering single leg loading. In other words, the pelvis must not drop laterally with high load or high-speed single leg support. Some possible solutions are the unilateral weighted carry, sled dragging variations, one-legged hip airplanes with speed, and one-legged bounding to create a bit of a strengthspeed-power continuum.

But most importantly, I must emphasize that these are just generic examples. I have to assess the player before to know what the major problem is, and the best exercise to achieve the goals while detracting as little as possible from their training capacity.

CW: Let me wrap this up by asking you what you feel are the biggest misconceptions about your training concepts? Fire away. SM: Wow, to start I usually get quoted with a sound bite specific to a situation or athlete. Don't assume that the quote was relevant for everyone. Individuals I see come to me for a reason, and most have a back

issue. Usually I have to get them back to world-class level when other approaches have failed. The approaches are special for a reason.

There also remains confusion between flexion motion and flexion moment, but this is not recognized within discussions of our work of "flexion." There are a number of laws, like Newton's laws of motion, that pertain to the back:

Keep power low. Each person has a training capacity that when exceeded, causes injury. Certain exercises steal training capacity and they wear out the spine before the muscles. Certain combinations of exercises are problematic while others are synergistic. Build proximal stiffness for distal explosive power this means a core that is stopping motion and not creating it. Choose exercises that spare the underlying joints when supertraining the neuromuscular elements. Don't believe that you can train the injury mechanism.

Those are just a few.

Chad, with your work with MMA athletes, we know the number of high-level jiu-jitsu athletes who have flexion-based debilitating pain yet they need the ability to flex their spine to compete. The trick is to train around this: train flexion moment and not the movement, and save the real flexion movement for the competition. Otherwise they will never be able to compete. We have both salvaged a few careers with this approach as have a number of expert colleagues who follow these approaches.

So there's a start.

CW: Excellent, Stu. Thanks for your time and incredible insight. SM: Thank you, Chad. . Techniques to achieve this are in my book, Ultimate Back Fitness and Performance.

Back to McGill A New Interview with Dr. Stuart McGill by Eric Cressey

Scroll through the archives here at T-Nation and you'll see that we don't interview just anyone. Now, scroll through the archives and check to see who's been interviewed twice. You won't find more than a few names. However, a few people have had such a profound impact on the world of health and human performance that they deserve a second go-round. Stuart McGill is one such individual.

Elite athletes regularly seek Dr. McGill's advice in hopes of saving their careers from devastating back problems. In March of 2006, I had the good fortune of seeing Dr. McGill speak in person for the first time. Admittedly, going into the seminar I was expecting a typical research presentation by a typical researcher. That is, I was expecting someone with a bunch of graphs and a lot of book smarts, but little real-world experience "under the bar" and on the field of performance much less the ability to show it off to those in attendance. My assumption couldn't have been further from the truth. Dr. McGill was fantastic so fantastic, in fact, that I've already made plans to see him speak at a two-day seminar to dozens of physical therapists this October.

Less than twenty minutes into the presentation, Dr. McGill took off his sweater and tie so that he could get "moving around." Over the next six hours, he moved around like a skilled athlete in his twenties, taking those in attendance through a variety of functional assessments and drills designed to identify and

correct problems. To say that I was impressed with his athletic ability and charismatic speaking would be an understatement and I have to admit that I was really damn flattered when he knew who I was!

A few years ago, Dr. McGill published the first edition of Ultimate Back Fitness and Performance, a book that delved into identifying and correcting low back dysfunction in order to build a healthy, efficient athlete. Just this year, Dr. McGill introduced the second edition of the book, which takes the crucial health-efficiency-performance link to a whole new level.

Dr. McGill was kind enough to take time out of his busy lecture, writing, research, and consulting schedule to share some of his thoughts with T-Nation.

T-Nation: Welcome, Dr. McGill. Thanks for taking the time to bring us up to speed since we last touched base with you. Dr. Stuart McGill: I'm glad to have the chance to do this again. T-Nation: I know you're not one to hold back when it comes to challenging the traditionalists, and with good reason: you're the one doing all the latest research! With that said, let's get things started by barbecuing some sacred cows. You have some strong thoughts on traditional "ab" training. Where are so many lifters missing the boat, and how can they fix the errors in their ways to improve performance, reduce the risk of injury, and build a solid midsection?

Dr. McGill: Well, I don't know if they really are missing the boat until I can see their motion and motor patterns, listen to them describe their training, what causes their back discomfort, what they're able to do pain-free, etc., etc. There's no question that a well-conditioned torso will enhance lifting performance; the issue is about how to develop the torso, or "core," to optimal levels without injury.

I've never seen any evidence that would justify abdominal hollowing, for example. Learning to brace all three layers of the abdominal wall (this means contracting all of the abs without moving them) is superior for enhancing stability. We've developed exercises documented to spare the back but challenge the abdominal muscles in a way that can be extremely difficult. You experienced this in our clinic last week. T-Nation: No doubt. You had some pretty experienced lifters, coaches, and trainers questioning their own foundations. Except me, of course. Tell the T-Nation audience about how perfect I was, Dr. McGill! Dr. McGill: Yes, Eric, you showed wonderful lumbar control! Once we have ensured that lumbar control is well established in the athlete, we may follow various protocols to challenge all of the neuromuscular compartments of the abdominal obliques. We then may focus on tuning the flexor mechanism (for example, push-up position, then walking the hands out in front and maintaining the bridge). From these, we move on to short-range plyometrics. So, I'm dismayed to see the number of people performing full range curl-ups over a gym ball, risking their backs. When is this done in real life? In the real world, the strength and power athlete uses torso stiffness as a short-range spring to direct hip and shoulder power through the linkage with minimal energy losses. Every great kicker, thrower, jumper, and lifter uses the core in this way.

T-Nation: Great points. It all comes back to efficiency once again. In the lifting population, what "energy leaks" are you looking for?

Dr. McGill: There are many. It may be a weaker joint forced into eccentric contraction while a power joint is concentrically contracting. In the back, perhaps the lumbar spine is breaking (flexing) before the required depth is reached. Here I may strap the spinal hinge with more latissimus dorsi contraction and also reap the benefits of more spine extension torque. In terms of lifting performance, I usually have a look at the whole lifting motion and then begin with appropriate corrections. Perhaps the feet haven't gripped the floor. Perhaps there's too much load in the knee as opposed to the hips. The lifters who lift closer to world records have less back load and higher hip load. Perhaps some hip flexion torque is required to drop the pelvis back into the "hole." It all depends on what the lifter shows. Usually, I'm able to add a few more pounds and sometimes more than a few. More importantly, though, we work to address the joints closest to failure tolerance.

Dr. McGill working with powerlifter and strongwoman competitor Liane Blyn. T-Nation: You really piqued my interest with your discussion of end-plate injuries in lifters. Can you please fill T-Nation readers in a bit more on these problems, their symptoms, diagnoses, and treatments?

Dr. McGill: Under large compressive loads on the spine, the end-plate of the vertebrae is usually the first tissue to damage (often with accompanying trabecular damage in the vertebrae). Given that it's a compressive injury, it's not surprising that the spine becomes compression intolerant, and provocative testing to assist in the diagnosis is based on compressive loading. Usually the standing heel drop will pick up compressive intolerance following an end-plate fracture. CT scans can sometimes pick them up. Interestingly, the fresh end-plate fracture can be immediately symptomatic, and other times it's very uncomfortable but not disabling. (I've had two in my life one in my neck where I finished the game and season, although I now have a flattened C4 disc and one lumbar that was immediately symptomatic and

quite symptomatic for a few years.) Treatment is usually time off with gradual progressions in the challenge of compressive loading. The choice of exercise is critical. T-Nation: Millions of people feel "tight" in their lower back, so they logically assume that the best way to fix the problem is to stretch the lower back out. With our DVDand writing, Mike Robertson and I have gone to great lengths to show that it's a deficit in hip mobility that's actually one of the problems, and that stability of the spine is what these people need. Care to elaborate? Dr. McGill: I agree. When we test athletes who complain of being tight, and who have been stretching to deal with this sensation, many show their problem to be neurogenic tension not always tight muscles. So, while stretching the back, hamstrings, and the like, may feel good as the stretch receptors are stimulated the neural tissues are stretched causing more stiffness the next day. Worse yet are those who may have stiffness due to disc bulges, and stretching only makes the bulges larger. Immobility of the hip joint has been shown to be a correlate of back troubles. True hip joint mobility can be trained in some people, but again, the source must be ferreted out. It could be a tight or compromised hip joint capsule, tight muscles, or neural tension. By the way, in lifters, neural tension usually originates in a lumbar root from a disc bulge. Stretching is contraindicated in this case. The key is to move or change posture to assist the bulge in reducing, then proceed with nerve root flossing techniques, then correct the faulty lifting pattern that caused the bulge in the first place.

T-Nation: Relative to popular exercise "wisdom," you have some unique thoughts on hamstring stretching, too, don't you?

Dr. McGill: I don't know if they're particularly unique. Our science is usually only confirming what the great lifters and coaches already know. I've mentioned neural tension, which too many perceive as muscle tension. This should never be stretched. But stretching may be used to address tight muscles. Interestingly, static stretching deadens the muscle from a neural perspective diminishing the stretch reflex and reducing peak strength and power. On the other hand, "active flexibility" facilitates muscle contraction and wakens the neural system. I find it incredible to see some lifters stretch before competition. Preferred approaches could include the nose-to-wall squat where circles are drawn with the nose mobilizing the hips, for example. The principle is to have the joints in motion and the elongated muscles under neural drive (i.e. not passively stretched). Stiff-legged sled dragging is another very justifiable and effective active flexibility

exercise that tunes both active muscle and enhances passive tissues. By this, I mean utilize passive tissue tensions enhanced with appropriate magnitude and timing of stiffening muscle contractions. I find a general misunderstanding of the passive tissues in the North American culture; they should be tuned and enhanced for performance not stretched away as if they're the boogeyman!

T-Nation: Last weekend, you touched on the topic of "powerful feet" in elite athletes, noting that everything starts from the ground up. Can you go into a bit more detail on this topic? How does it relate to back health and performance? And I'm sure that our audience would love some training tips in this regard. Dr. McGill: It depends on the athlete. In the lifter, optimal hip extensor power requires hip external rotation and abduction. To do this, the lifter needs to grip the floor isometrically, try and externally rotate the hips, and also "spread the floor." The floor grip is accomplished with the toes and the heels actually gripping the floor inside the shoe. This also widens the base of support and gives the lifter more stability, which ultimately creates the conditions for optimal hip drive and the steerage of load through the linkage. Sometimes we start shoeless foot gripping exercises with the lifter to develop this type of essential foot athleticism. We'd also do this with golfers and strongman competitors who have to grip the ground when pulling/pushing, etc.

On the other hand, a runner or jumper needs to stiffen the foot and optimize the short-range spring. This would constitute an entirely different type of training that would probably include rapid foot "ricochet" exercises, for example. I must also mention that I claim no expertise beyond the back; however, if the issue relates to the back, I want to investigate it. Foot athleticism is very important for back performance!

Dr. McGill working with research subjects in the "Lifting Lab." T-Nation: Fantastic stuff. Now, let's talk about the new edition of your Ultimate Back Fitness and Performance book. I'm just one of many coaches who hasn't been able to say enough good things about the first version since it was introduced. What can readers expect to see in the new edition?

Dr. McGill: The new edition has a new chapter on transitional training going from stability, endurance, strength, speed, and power, to a specific performance requirement. I also introduce the concept of "Superstiffness," which has resulted from our recent work. In a nutshell, we show techniques to bind muscles together to create stiffness at weaker joints so that the power joints aren't constrained the leapers know how to do this as do the big lifters and martial artists. It was really a matter of studying the best to see how they did it. We show how to conquer sticking points and how to enhance speed. It's the same principle. Take a sprinter, for example. Muscle contraction is stiffening and paradoxically slows movement. When we measured top sprinters, they were amazingly relaxed with incredible speed of contraction and incredible relaxation within each cycle. They ran on their tightened passive tissues with a short explosion of muscular force and stiffness at the precise time.

We saw the same in the great golfers a relaxed backswing and downstroke, but an enormous stiffening contraction at ball impact. This was followed with immediate relaxation to preserve the speed of the follow through. We learned why we have a poor shot when we try to "kill the ball." We actually slow ourselves down with too much muscle force! Optimizing superstiffness is a wonderful concept.

Also, in the book I've added a new "squat clinic" that shows how to systematically go through the mechanics while looking for potential improvement opportunities. The new edition has another 60 pages of new text. The postmen are going to have to start training! T-Nation: What's coming up next for you in the research world? Dr. McGill: There's certainly more to come down the road as further research develops. While it's our policy to not disclose too much information about our research until we know for sure, I can tell you that we're making substantial progress in our understanding of the disc herniation process and what may be done to interrupt the cumulative trauma. On the training front, we're perfecting the tuning of the core muscles for specific performance events.

T-Nation: It sounds like a third edition is already in the works! Let's conclude on a general note. If you had to make a few broad recommendations on avoiding lower back pain for everyone from the weekend warrior to the elite athlete, what would they be? Dr. McGill: This is a huge question and really needs the book. We cover the five stages of organizing a training regimen, starting with recognizing perturbed motion/motor patterns and various corrective exercises. Then we move to stability, endurance, strength, speed, and power, in that order. We give suggestions and tests for assessing the "balance" among strength, mobility, stability, endurance, balancing skill, etc.

For example, a football running back can train with power cleans to a high level of proficiency, but if he can't perform a one-legged squat matrix without falling over, he can't truly make use of that strength and power in an athletic context. We've tried to encompass these ideas into algorithms to guide athletes and coaches in a systematic way.

T-Nation: Interesting stuff. Thanks for your time, Dr. McGill. Where can readers pick up a copy of your new book?

Dr. McGill: My pleasure. The book is available through www.backfitpro.com.

Note: Three years ago, Marc Demers also interviewed Dr. McGill. If you liked this article, be sure to checkout that original interview for more great info.

Debunking Exercise Myths, Part I by Eric Cressey

We live in a society that doesn't want gray areas. People want right or wrong, up or down, and left or right. This mindset carries over to the gym, too; lifters want to be able to say that Exercise A is evil, and Exercise B is safe. Unfortunately, it's not that simple, so with that in mind, I'm devoting this article to killing off some myths, establishing some more well-defined gray areas, and making recommendations on who can do what. I'm going to come right out and say it: in the absence of musculoskeletal pathology, no movement is fundamentally bad. Sure, there are exercises like kickbacks and leg extensions that don't give you as much bang for your buck as their multi-joint counterparts (e.g. dips and squats), but that's not to say that these pansy exercises are "bad" for you. Likewise, it's rare that I write any sort of machine lift into my programming, but there are rehabilitation patients that benefit greatly from certain machine training. In my opinion, there are only five scenarios in which exercise is ever truly bad for you from a health standpoint: 1. When that exercise is performed in excessive volume. 2. When that exercise is performed with poor technique. 3. When that exercise is performed in a manner that puts it out of balance with the rest of the programming that is in place. 4. When that exercise irritates an existing injury or condition. 5. When that exercise is performed with excessive loading (relative to the lifter's capabilities). Now, it's not feasible for me to outline every specific instance where every exercise is safe or unsafe, but I can address some common adages we frequently hear in our gyms.

Adage #1: Your knees shouldn't pass your toes when you squat. First off, you need to consider whether you're a powerlifter or a bodybuilder. In other words, are you planning on hammering your posterior chain by using predominantly the hamstrings, glutes and lumbar erectors to complete the movement? Or, are you looking to overload the quads?

It goes without saying that the movements are significantly different, so it's important to first differentiate between the two. In the powerlifting squat, you'll be sitting back, arching hard, and attempting to keep the shins perpendicular to the floor; in other words, there will be more trunk flexion, thus facilitating recruitment of the hip extensors and enabling you to get to parallel easier. While the knee extensors are going to be involved to some extent (as there is knee flexion occurring on the eccentric), it's the muscles acting at the hip that account for the majority of the force that brings you out of the hole. It is, however, virtually impossible to squat rock bottom with a powerlifting style squat; your chest would be on top of your thighs far before your hamstrings hit your calves (unless you have freaky big hamstrings and calves). In the Olympic version of the squat, initiating the movement is still about sitting back, but not nearly to the same degree as the former example. Essentially, we're looking for a happy medium between sitting back and sitting down. The knees are going to come in front of the toes simply because this is the only way to get deep when the trunk is more upright; if the knees stay directly above the toes on an Olympic squat, your base of support is too narrow, your center of gravity is shifted backward, and you fall backward (and still don't get your depth). You see this all the time in beginners. It's almost as pathetic as when they talk on their cell phones in the gym. So, the question arises of whether or not the knees coming in front of the toes during the Olympic squat is dangerous. Fry, Smith, and Schilling (2003) examined joint kinetics during back squats under two conditions.(1) In the first condition, a board placed in front of the participants' shins restricted the forward displacement of the knees. In the second condition, movement wasn't restricted at all; they squatted normally, and the knees passed the toes (gasp!). The researchers found that restricting the forward excursion of the knees during the squat increased anterior lean of the trunk and promoted an increased "internal angle at the knees and ankles." The results were a 22% decrease in knee torque and a 1070% increase in hip torque! Sure, they "saved" the knees by limiting stress on them, but those forces were transferred more than tenfold to the hips and lower back! The researchers concluded that "appropriate joint loading during this exercise may require the knees to move slightly past the toes". "May?" Ugh. I mean honestly; look at these photos that the authors included. Isn't the lumbo-pelvic position in "B" just lovely?

Source: Fry and Smith, 2003, J Strength Cond Res. In consideration of this study and photo "B," some might wonder whether powerlifting squats are safe on the hips and lower back. My answer is a resounding "YES" for several reasons. First, powerlifters attempt to minimize, not eliminate, the knees coming in front of the toes. There is always going to be at least subtle anterior excursion of the knees relative to the feet. Second, powerlifters know to sit back and not down when they squat; the participants in this study were still attempting to do the latter when they performed the restricted squats. If you try to Olympic squat with the shins perpendicular to the floor; your lower back is going to round... period. Engaging in this debate would amount to comparing apples and oranges. Third, powerlifters are proficient at establishing and maintaining a tight arch of the lumbar spine; this position is crucial to keeping the chest up and, in turn, the center of gravity within the base of support (or else the movement becomes a good morning). This position also places the hamstrings at a mechanical advantage. Fourth, powerlifters assume a squatting stance that is at least a little wider than that of Olympic lifters; this repositioning "opens up" the hips and enables one to get deeper without considerable forward excursion of the knees. Fifth, photo "B" is not a powerlifting squat; it's just a mess of torso and limbs with a bar on top.

Adage #2: You should not squat below parallel. I'm on a roll with the squatting issue, so I might as well stick with it. Let's get something straight right off the bat: the "parallel" designation is something that was not borne out of any biomechanical rationale whatsoever. Rather, it is a product of needing a way to determine if the squat is completed in lifting

competition. Where people lost sight of this fact is beyond my comprehension, so I'll simply ask this: would you use partial range of motion on other exercises in a healthy individual without any exercise contraindications? I didn't think so. Although this reasoning ought to be enough for most of you, how about a little literature to back this up? Salem and Powers (2001) looked at patellofemoral joint kinetics in female collegiate athletes at three different depths: 70 degrees (above parallel), 90 degrees (at parallel), and 110 degrees (below parallel) of knee flexion. The researchers found that "Peak knee extensor moment, patellofemoral joint reaction force and patellofemoral joint stress did not vary significantly between the three squatting trials (2);" there was no support for the idea that squatting below parallel increases stress on the patellofemoral joint. It's important to also note that squatting depth should be determined by the athlete's flexibility and goals, as well as the nature of his sport. If one doesn't have the flexibility to get below parallel safely, then the rock-bottom squat shouldn't be part of his arsenal; this athlete's attention would be better devoted elsewhere and possibly supplemented with squats at or above parallel. It stands to reason that different athletes will have different goals in light of the demands of their sports, too. For instance, Olympic lifters and rock climbers would require positions of deep closed-chain knee flexion more often that offensive linemen and marathoners. Then again, the nature of some sports requires that deep squatting be used to offset the imbalances that result from always working the knee extensors in the 1/4 and 1/2 squat positions; this is one reason that cyclists, hockey players, and athletes who do significant amounts of running (e.g. soccer players, marathoners) ought to prioritize deep squatting and single-leg movements early in the off-season. Finally, it's important to remember that while a full range-of-motion squat will offer noticeable carryover to top-end strength, 1/4 squats will not yield strength increases in the lower positions. Effectively, you get more bang for your training buck by squatting deep, which is one reason why this modality is the best option for those purely interested in looking good nekkid.

Adage #3: Your toes should point straight-ahead when squatting. "Should" and "Can" are two completely different stories. In order to squat, leg press, or do any other closed-chain movement involving considerable knee flexion, we need a certain amount of dorsiflexion range of motion at our ankles. Unfortunately, as Mike Robertson and I pointed out in our Neanderthal No Moreseries, a large percentage of the population has tight calves and tends to over-pronate at the subtalar joints (leading to flat feet). As a result, dorsiflexion ROM is compromised, and if the lifter tries to squat deep with the toes pointing straight ahead, he must compensate by a) rising up on the toes, b) increasing the amount of hip flexion, or c) combining the two in what makes for an extremely ugly squat.

Fortunately, you can alleviate these problems by simply externally rotating the feet (pointing the toes outward); doing so "unlocks" the ankles and gives you the requisite amount of dorsiflexion you'll need to squat. You should still, however, work toward a point where you can squat with the feet pointing nearly straight ahead; this "work" should consist of loosening up the hip flexors and plantarflexors.

Adage #4: Good mornings are bad for your back. Generalizations are a very dangerous thing. I think it's fair to say that the ordinary folks who criticize you for doing GMs assume that you're using the exercise to train the lumbar erectors and not the entire posterior chain, specifically the glutes and hamstrings. Essentially, these individuals fail to differentiate between lumbar and pelvic motion. I'll be blunt; rounding the lumbar spine under compressive loads is not a good thing. In the position of full forward flexion, the passive structures (discs, ligaments and thoracolumbar fascia) and NOT the muscles bear the overwhelming majority of the load. This occurrence is referred to as the "flexion relaxation response of the erector spinae."(3,4) This position is bad enough for the ordinary trainee, but even worse for folks with shear instability conditions like spondylolisthesis. In fact, this group of individuals should avoid lumbar flexion exercises such as sit-ups (more on that in Part II) and even reverse hypers, which have received much praise in rehabilitating lower back injuries of different sorts. So what can we do to make good mornings safe? How about a little of modern-day natural selection in a resistance training context where only the strongest survive? Let's say that we have 100 trainees that represent the gym-going population as a whole. Roughly 65 of these individuals will be deconditioned with a complete lack of proficiency in any realm of fitness; we can eliminate them from the good morning pool immediately. For the sake of this argument, based on all the emails I receive and my experience on the T-Nation forums, I'm going to estimate that the majority of our readers are in the "Upper 35" echelon. I'd estimate that 20 of this echelon's trainees, although possessing an average level of general fitness, need to be focusing on other core exercises before moving to those (like good mornings) that sit a little higherup on the risk continuum. Exercises like deadlifts, squats, various presses, rows, dips and a boatload of prehab work are what they need. Good mornings may come eventually, but they don't need to worry about crossing that road just yet. That's not to say, however, that there aren't steps to be taken in anticipation of crossing that road. Specifically, it's important that they learn the concept of abdominal bracing to optimize spinal stability. As Stuart McGill has vehemently advocated, you should imagine "locking the rib cage to the pelvis."(5) A ton of core work is just what the doctor ordered, in these cases.

Serious postural issues and substitution patterns in the lumbo-pelvic area are contraindications to really hitting GMs hard. An accentuated lordotic curve is the most concerning issue on this front; if your lumbar erectors are overactive to compensate for a lack of glute and hamstring contribution, the only way to prestretch the "faulty" prime movers and potentiate force generation is lumbar flexion. As I noted above, the flexion relaxation response phenomenon makes this a very bad idea. The remaining 15 are in a position where they can properly execute GMs, -that is, unless they have a significant (either cumulative or single traumatic) history of lower back injuries. If they're part of this atrisk population, I recommend that they stay away from GMs altogether. Last I heard, it's estimated that about 80% of people have some sort of lower back pain during their lives, so this issue obviously carries over to the aforementioned trainee groups, too. I'd estimate that this eliminates another three trainees, 20% of our hardcore crew. We're down to twelve legitimate candidates, eight of whom can safely perform the GMs in 5+ range, but their form goes down the tubes when the weight gets too heavy and they panic. In my experience, form is far more likely to crap out under heavy loading than it is under accumulated fatigue in the last few reps of a set. This leaves us with the Final Four. What can I say? I'm writing this from the college basketball capital of the universe during March Madness, and I went with the mood. These four T-Men are ready for "chaos training" as outlined by Dave Tatehere. Brace the core, maintain a neutral spine, and you're good to go. Potvin et al. (1991) asserted that "the risk of injury may be influenced more by the degree of lumbar flexion than the choice of stoop or squat technique."(4) If you only take one thing away from this article, let it be that the spine should not flex under heavy load. So, out of 100 trainees, I estimate that twelve are actually able to handle GMs in their programming, and only four of them can get really hit them heavy. In T-Man terms, it works out to about a third of you doing them, but only one-tenth of you doing them balls-to-the-wall. Then again, even that is going to be dependent on your goals. In consideration of the good morning debate, I'm reminded of something Dr. Jeff Anderson, Director of Sports Medicine at the University of Connecticut, said to me once: "If you live your life the right way, you'll likely find yourself in an orthopedist's office at some point. If you live it the wrong way, you'll likely end up in cardiologist's office instead."(6). Need proof? Granhed and Morelli (1988) found that retired heavyweight lifters demonstrated a markedly greater reduction in disc height on x-rays when compared with age-matched controls.(7) You simply

need to find how far toward one end of the spectrum you want to be. If you want to do something incredible, you need to be willing to take risks while maximizing safety.

Adage #5: You should wear a belt. This issue has been addressed quite a bit, but for some reason, the message never seems to hit home with people. Perhaps the problem is that a lot of the research cited only investigates the use of belts in workplace safety scenarios and not resistance training contexts. As is the case with a lot of these adages, the decision to use or not use a belt is goal-dependent. First, let's make it clear that you should not be using a belt for anything below 90% of 1RM; for most, this comprises sets of more than three reps. One of the most common misconceptions regarding belt use in a resistance training context is that simply because the belt assists in increasing intra-abdominal pressure (IAP), it must automatically reduce the compressive load on the spine. This is completely false; the belt certainly doesn't have a favorable impact on compressive forces, and may even increase the compressive load! (5) It's readily apparent that wearing a belt has helped many lifters to move heavier weights than they would under "raw" conditions, but the question remains: do they decrease the risk of injury? Well, in consideration of the fact that they restrict the end of the range of motion in lumbar spine flexion, one would have to agree that they do, especially in those who cannot maintain a neutral spine. Interestingly, this is one of the reasons belts can add pounds to your total; they facilitate the elastic response to torso flexion; the more neutral the spine is (as it should be), the less profound this effect is. Oddly enough, as McGill puts it, "to obtain the maximal effect from a belt, the lifter must lift poorly and in a way that exposed the back to a much higher risk of injury."(5) An additional mechanism by which belts increase one's ability to move big weights are via expansion of the base of support to increase torso stiffness when placed under heavy loads. This stiffness helps to prevent the spine from buckling. (As someone with a pretty sound knowledge of biomechanics, I can assure you that buckling is a bad thing.) Belt use and "natural" methods to increase IAP are both effective in enhancing stability, both individually and in tandem.(8) So what's the problem with belt use? It alters firing patterns such that the belt becomes a crutch, and important core musculature is not called upon to stabilize the spine. Considerable evidence exists to suggest that wearing a belt causes individuals to unknowingly alter their motor patterns. Cholewicki et al. (1999) compared belt use and increasing intra-abdominal pressure "naturally" under situations where lumbar spine stability was challenged via a sudden load release (in either trunk flexion,

extension, or lateral flexion). The investigators found that belt use caused activity to decrease for the thoracic erector spinae in extension and the lumbar erector spinae in flexion (8). With all this in mind, here are four broad recommendations for belt use: 1. Gym-goers with purely physique benefits in mind have little to no use for belts. 2. Powerlifters and those most interested in optimizing strength should use belts as a means of increasing spinal stability only on their heaviest attempts. A noteworthy exception is when the belt is used to hold other equipment (e.g. squat suit, bench shirt) in place. 3. When used, belts should be coupled with natural methods of increasing IAP. 4. Use belts for winning competitions, not improving core strength. Debunking Exercise Myths, Part II by Eric Cressey

In Part I, our first five adages focused predominantly on the lower body. Now, in Part 2, well look closely at some commonly maligned upper body exercises.

Adage #6: Bench pressing will destroy your shoulders. This one makes me want to pull out my hair. The bench press and its variations have tremendous value in training the upper body; problems arise when people train their egos and not the movements. This egotistical bench approach can be summed up with the following: 1. Lack of balance in training volume: This imbalance is present in a) internal and external rotation of the humerus, b) lack of balance between scapular protraction and retraction (and often inappropriate protraction substitution patterns), and c) horizontal adduction and horizontal abduction. The solutions are actually quite simple: bench less; do more horizontal pulling, external rotations and horizontal abduction exercises (i.e. posterior deltoid work); and incorporate some isolated scapular protraction work to activate the serratus anterior (see the Neanderthal No More series for specific exercises). 2. Poor technique: Unless you're a powerlifter in competition, don't get caught up in just using the grip (usually an ultra wide one) that allows you to move the most iron. Instead, you should choose a grip that takes into account shoulder health, recruitment patterns and carryover to sport. In terms of shoulder health, in almost all cases, a narrower grip will be the safest, with anything outside of 1.5 times shoulder-width putting you at markedly greater risk (1,2). From a recruitment pattern

standpoint, a close grip will overload the triceps to a greater degree, whereas a wider grip will involve the pectoralis major more. Using a 14-inch grip tends to have the greatest carryover to athletics. Just think of the position from which you block in football, throw a chest pass in basketball, check in hockey, grapple with an opponent in mixed martial arts, or support your body weight while in the missionary position. A comprehensive description of benching technique is beyond the scope of this article, but if I had to give ten cues, theyd be 1) chest high, 2) elbows tucked, 3) scapulae retracted, 4) lower back neutral or arched, 5) feet on floor, 6) tight core (braced), 7) elbows under the bar, 8) get a lift-off, and 9) pull the bar down to you, and 10) spread the bar as you think about pressing yourself away from it (through the bench). Also, in terms of bar speed, a controlled eccentric is much easier on your shoulders than ballistic work (3), so if you have a history of injury, youd be best off avoiding bench throws and speed benches unless youre completely in the clear. I cannot overstate the importance of keeping the chest high and e lbows tucked, as doing so will prevent hyperextension in the bottom position of the bench press. This hyperextension has been linked to anterior glenohumeral instability related to capsular trauma and too much traction on the acromioclavicular (AC) joint.(4,5) Osteolysis of the distal clavicle can also become a serious problem in those who hyperextend the shoulder in the bottom position of the bench press.(6) 3. Lack of flexibility, or excessive flexibility: On one hand, we have the average gym rat that has benched his way to posture so bad that it would put Quasimoto to shame. With such internally rotated humeri and anteriorly tilted, winging scapulae, the subacromial space (space in the "shoulder" joint) is markedly compromised, and the rotator cuff can be easily irritated with various overhead activities and horizontal pressing. This situation is known as external impingement, and affected individuals need to fix their posture in order to bench safely. On the other hand, youll encounter individuals (commo nly overhead throwing athletes) with hypermobility at the glenohumeral joint; essentially, theres too much room in the socket, and the humeral head clanks off of the rotator cuff and eventually leads to rotator cuff damage (internal impingement). These folks may need surgery to tighten things up, although many can work around the injuries and hypermobility with specific rotator cuff and scapular strengthening exercises as well as modification of form on (or completely avoiding) certain exercises. 4. Training through pain: I dont think I need to go into much detail on this one. Suffice it to say that the overwhelming majority of lifters experience shoulder pain at some point during their time in the iron game. If something causes you pain, dont do it. Bench pressing is not inherently evil; its only a problem when stubborn lifters apply it inappropriately in their programming and perform the exercise itself incorrectly.

Adage #7: You should avoid overhead pressing.

If this is the case, I guess I better not store anything on the top shelf, huh? Okay, in all seriousness, we need to understand the rationale behind such an assertion before we can get into all the finer subtleties. There are two broad camps: those who say "you just dont need it" and those who insist that "its dangerous." In the former case, the fundamental rationale is essentially one of training economy. If you have a limited amount of time to spend in the gym, and a limited recovery capacity, you need to choose the exercises that will give you the most bang for your training buck without exceeding your bodys capacity to recovery. Many insist that one simply doesnt need direct "shoulder work" (and I put that in parentheses because I abhor body part training) simply because the deltoids receive adequate stimulus from horizontal pressing (benches), and pulling (rows), and vertical pulling (pull-ups/pulldowns). These folks insist that at the very most, you need a few supplemental sets of lateral raises to target the middle head of the deltoid, and with that completed, you can sit back and wait for your cannonball delts to emerge.

Personally, though, I view recovery as systemic more than muscle-specific, so I examine how my overall volume is distributed and then make that determination. In other words, trainees with better recovery capabilities can afford to do this extra volume. Moreover, I look to consider if I need more biomechanical balance in my programming; will some overhead pressing help to "cancel out" some vertical pulling Im doing? Finally, I look at the demands of the athletes sport or the bodybuilders goals; if an athlete needs to be strong overhead (e.g. basketball player) or a bodybuilder needs to bring up his taters, Im going to incorporate overhead pressing at the expense of something else. Ever since I wrote Cracking the Rotator Cuff Conundrum, Ive been inundated with emails from frustrated trainees with bum shoulders. You know what the vast majority of them share in common? Poor balance in programming, mostly as a result of insisting that they need to have a separate day just for shoulders. Next, we have the "its dangerous" camp standing on their soapboxes trying to frighten us all off with a gross generalization. The basis for this allegation is that overhead pressing is dangerous because when you move with the humerus abducted/flexed past 90 degrees (upper arm parallel with the floor), youre compromising the subacromial space. The tendons of the rotator cuff pass through this space, and IF the rotator cuff is weak and/or the scapula is anteriorly tilted, the space is limited to the point that the tendons will become impinged (hence the term external impingement) between the humeral head and the glenoid fossa (shoulder socket) of the scapula. Did you notice the big, bold "if?" For those with normal positioning of the scapulae and strong, healthy rotator cuffs that can depress the humeral head effectively, there is absolutely no need to avoid overhead pressing out of fear of injury, as there will be sufficient room for the tendons to pass through this space without irritation. Performing the movements in the scapular plane can further reduce the likelihood of subacromial impingement. This plane allows for improved joint surface conformity; appropriate rotator cuff alignment, which leads to increased activity of the infraspinatus and teres minor in stabilization of the humeral head (4,7,8), and minimized stress on the inferior glenohumeral ligament.(9) The scapular plane is located about 30 degrees anterior of the frontal plane. In other words, raise your arm as if you were about to start a rep on the pec deck, and then do 1/3 of cross-chest fly. One can also use a neutral grip to make overhead pressing with dumbbells more safe; this movement at the lower arm corresponds to external rotation of the humerus, which decreases the likelihood of subacromial impingement.(10) Now, there are going to be a ton of individuals who I dont feel should be overhead pressing. Incidentally, almost all these trainees are outstanding candidates for the programs Mike Robertson and I outlined in Neanderthal No More IV and V. The anteriorly tilted position of the scapulae and internally rotated humeri are problematic in themselves, but when you consider that these postural issues correspond to altered length-tension relationships, and therefore weakness of crucial scapular stabilizers and rotator cuff muscles, overhead pressing is the last thing that these individuals need to consider. In fact, those who are

already experiencing shoulder pain shouldnt even be doing back squats or good mornings until they get these issues resolved. So, to summarize, overhead pressing is cool if a) your shoulder girdles are healthy and strong, b) it can be incorporated without messing up structural balance in your programming, c) your sport/weaknesses necessitate its inclusion, and d) youre factoring it in to your overall volume equation. And, you can potentially make it even cooler if youre pressing in the scapular plane with a neutral grip.

Adage #8: Behind-the-neck (BTN) movements are dangerous. Concurrent extreme external rotation and abduction has been termed the "at-risk" (or 90/90) position by many practitioners, so behind-the-neck lat pulldowns and presses have been blacklisted. These individuals cite potential problems with anterior glenohumeral instability(4,5), external impingement, internal impingement (a new-age diagnosis common in overhead throwing athletes with hypermobility), acromioclavicular joint degeneration, and even the risk of intervertebral disc injuries (due to the flexed neck position). The infraspinatus and teres minor are shortened in the 90/90 position, and may therefore be ineffective as depressors of the humeral head due to shortcomings in terms of the length-tension relationship.(7) In my opinion, you must view the two exercises independently of one another. For starters, one must differentiate between exercises involving traction and approximation at the glenohumeral joint. Pulldowns (like most cable exercises) are an example of a traction exercise, as they pull the head of the humerus away from the glenoid fossa. Various pressing exercises, on the other hand, involve approximation; they drive the head of the humerus further into the "socket." Approximation exercises increase the likelihood of subacromial impingement much more than traction exercises, and this is why exercises like pulldowns, pull-ups and shrugs can be integrated into rehabilitation programs before various presses. So, on paper, pulldowns in the "at-risk" position are less dangerous than presses. However, in comparison to all the pulldown variations you can do in front of the neck, going BTN is just going to shorten your range of motion and reduce activation of the very musculature youre trying to train.(11) Plus, its just painful to watch people do these because this exercise invariably turns into a jerking, seizure-like motion. The in-front version poses much less risk and offer a better training effect, so why anyone would opt for BTN pulldowns is beyond me. I guess its fo r the same reason some people listen to John Tesh; they just enjoy pain, misery and being looked at like theyre nuts. In spite of the approximation issues, I think that you can make a great case for the inclusion of BTN presses for certain individuals. This position allows for comparable loads to the anterior position without compromising range of motion. If youre considering implementing the exercise, there are several factors that must be taken into account:

1) Cumulative Volume of the 90/90 position: If youre already doing back squats and good mornings, youd likely be better off holding off on BTN presses in order to avoid overloading this potentially harmful position. If you decided to front squat or use a deadlift variation instead of good mornings, though, you might clear up some "space" for BTN presses. You need to consider this cumulative volume from both an acute and chronic sense. There may even be times in the year when you avoid the 90/90 position altogether. 2) Cumulative Trauma to the Anterior Shoulder Capsule: The 90/90 position isnt the only thing that can irritate the anterior shoulder capsule. Bench pressing and pulldowns/pull-ups also contribute to cumulative stress on this area. I know that I cant handle BTN pressing with my powerlift ing volume, and I cant say that I know many powerlifters who utilize BTN presses on a regular basis. We simply get enough stress on this front (pun intended) from squats, good mornings, and bench press variations. As is the case with #1, you need to consider both acute and chronic trauma. 3) Goal of Inclusion: Very simply, you need to ask yourself: why are you doing this exercise? If youre someone with much to be gained from BTN presses, then they deserve much more consideration than if youre a regular ol weekend warrior or senior citizen who is just interested in getting in shape and staying healthy. As I noted with good mornings in Part I, it all comes down to how much youre willing to risk. 4) Flexibility: In order to be able to perform BTN movements with the most safety, one needs to have a considerable amount of humeral external rotation range of motion. As a rule of thumb, if someone has trouble back squatting with anything narrower than an ultra-wide grip, I dont want them doing BTN pressing. 5) Injury History: If you have a history of rotator cuff problems, Id advise against performing BTN movements unless youve been asymptomatic for an extended period of time. Even then, approach the exercise with caution in your programming and carefully consider your alternatives. 6) Posture: This issue parallels #4 for several reasons. First, if youve got significant anterior tilt and winging of the scapulae and internal rotation of the humeri, you arent going to have the flexibility to get into the proper position to do BTN presses. And, even if you can manage to squirm your way under the bar, when you start to press, youll be at greater risk of subacromial impingement due to the inability of the scapulae to posteriorly tilt with overhead pressing. This is a common scapular dyskinesis pattern related to weakness of several scapular stabilizers, most notably the serratus anterior. Of perhaps greater concern is the tendency to want to compensate for this lack of flexibility by either flexing the necksomething you want to avoid at all costs in a weight-training contextor allowing forward head posture (where the chin protrudes off a less-flexed neck) to take over. Most people have problems with forward head posture, so the last thing you want to do is reinforce it.

The take-home message on BTN movements is that BTN pulldowns belong in the garbage can, and BTN presses should be used sparingly only in those who meet certain criteria, can effectively write strength training programs, and are willing to assume a bit of risk.

Adage #9: Upright rows are shoulder killers. Ill be blunt: in my experience, of all the potentially harmful exercises for the shoulder girdle, this one warrants the most apprehension. Remember how I spoke earlier about using a neutral grip to "open up" the subacromial space when overhead pressing? Well, the theory behind this recommendation is that supinating the forearm to the neutral position corresponds to externally rotating the humerus and, in turn, adjusting the alignment of the humeral head in the glenoid fossa to mechanically make room for the tendons of the rotator cuff to do their thing. A barbell upright row does the exact opposite of this; the maximally internally rotated position of the humerus that corresponds to the pronated grip isnt an ideal positionespecially if youre going to be abducting/flexing the humerus (as in an upright row).

You may be someone who has seen fantastic results with upright rows, but personally, I dont write them into any of my programs. If I want to overload the delts, I can do so via more effective means (benching, overhead pressing, rows, pull-ups and lateral raises). If I want to overload the upper traps, Ill stick with deadlifts, Olympic lifts, and shrugs; all allow for greater loading and a more systemic effect. If you feel like you really need to include some sort of upright rowing variation, Id encourage you to use dumbbells, which allow you to adjust the plane of motion and grip to some extent, and thus reduce the aforementioned risks. Now, you may be wondering why barbell upright rows arent on my list of favorites, yet I dont advocate against Olympic lifts. Good question! Heres my rationale. For proper functioning of the glenohumeral joint beyond 50 degrees of abduction or flexion, you need some external rotation to occur.(12) Obviously, dumbbells are very practical and safe in this regard, but

you might be surprised to discover that barbells are in fact just as safe when the Olympic lifts and their variations are executed correctly. There are several subtle, yet significant differences between (for example) the high pull and the upright row. First and foremost, the upper body aspect of the high pull is assisted by the hip and knee extensors and ankle plantarflexors; this triple extension lessens the burden on the shoulder girdle. In essence, the lifter is executing a lower body exercise, but integrating a violent shrugging motion while maintaining the extended elbow position for as long as possible. Effectively, this teaches the lifter to pull with the lower body and upper traps not with the deltoids and biceps. If O-lifting makes you sorer in your shoulders and arms than in your upper back and posterior chain, I suggest you find a good USA Weightlifting coach before your next session. Overdeveloped deltoids (relative to the depressors of the humerus) are a common culprit when it comes to subacromial impingement; by lessening their involvement, there is less "encouragement" to humeral abduction than that which is generated simply from momentum from other muscles. Second, the explosive manner in which the Olympic lifts are executed corresponds to partial temporary deloading at the portion of the movement where the rotator cuff is most at risk of impingement, whereas the resistance is constant in a slow-paced movement like the upright row. This effect is even more pronounced in clean and snatch variations where the lifter attempts to get under the bar as quickly as possible; in experienced weightlifters, the bar doesnt even reach the 50 -degree mark. Even if it does pass the 50-degree point, youre still externally rotating the humerus to complete the clean or snatch, so youre in the clear. In ACSM Recap: Part I, I quoted accomplished weightlifter and coach Gary Valentine recalling that the late Joe Mills used to say, "Any weight that you can get past your belly button with some momentum, you can clean."(13) No delts needed; my apologies to the bodybuilders in the crowd. Third, the movement of the torso is markedly different between the Olympic lifts and the upright row. In the former, the lifter is extending the torso as the bar is pulled upward, so while the upper trapezius is primarily active as a scapular elevator, its also active (along with the middle and lower trapezius and rhomboids) as a scapular retractor in an attempt to keep the bar close to the body. Watch anyone do an upright row, and youll see that they dont really care about bar path unless theyre trying to make the movement easier by bringing the barbell closer to them. This movement is accomplished by positioning of the deltoidsnot active contraction of crucial scapular stabilizers. Because the trapezius complex works synergistically with the serratus anterior in posteriorly tilting the scapula (which mechanically increases the subacromial space with overhead activities), activating the whole trap shebang helps to keep the shoulders healthy.

Fourth, typical volume schemes for upright rows and Olympic lifts are completely different. O-lifters rarely (and shouldnt) exceed sets of 5-6 reps, as the Olympic lifts and their variations are highly technical movements that should be performed rapidly. Conversely, upright rows are performed at bodybuilding tempos (read: slower than molasses going uphill on a cold winter day) with as many as 1520 reps per set in some programs. Over time, this volume adds up, especially when its accompanied by loads of pressing lateral raises, and pull-up variations. Fifth, you need a significant amount of upper body flexibility to execute the Olympic lifts properly. Any schmuck can walk into a gym and try an upright row. As such, the former carries much less risk; think of this flexibility as the ID you need to get into the Olympic lifting nightclub. If you have it, youre on the inside with fancy martinis and gorgeous women. If you dont, youre stuck in the alley with a "40" in a paper bag, some homely old skank, and a bum shoulder to bootor something like that. Just use your imagination.

Adage #10: Sit-ups are dangerous. We might as well conclude with one of the oldestyet still unresolveddebates in our industry. As a little background, theres considerable opposition to the use of sit -up variations in exercise programming for several reasons: 1. Generally, individuals perform sit-ups because they assume theyre training their abdominals; its too bad that sit-ups preferentially recruit the hip flexors! When compared to the curl-up (which is about as good as they come in terms of "isolating" the rectus abdominis), the sit-up elicits significantly higher activation of the rectus femoris and psoas major (two hip flexors).(14,15) Contrary to popular belief, performing sit-ups with the knees bent does not take the rectus femoris out of the movement; in fact, its activation is higher with the knees flexed !(14,16) 2. The psoas major has attachments on the T12 and each of the lumbar vertebrae. When activated, it imposes significant compression (~3,300 N, 730 lbs.) on the spine. Coincidentally, McGill (2004) reported that 3,300 N is also the action limit for low back compression in workers as set forth by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH, or the Canadian equivalent of OSHA). In other words, each sit-up you perform exceeds the level of loading that is associated with an increased risk of on-the-job injuries!(17) 3. In the classic postural distortion patterns, the hip flexors are overactive and the rectus abdominis is relatively "dormant." Curl-up variations offer greater activation of the rectus abdominis without the compressive loading and shear stress on the lumbar spine (15), and can therefore be a valuable part of programs to prevent or rehabilitate low back injuries and improve lumbo-pelvic posture.

These three reasons are sufficient justification for omitting sit-ups altogether if youre purely looking to "isolate" the rectus abdominis and train for general health; there are clearly numerous other options available to you that offer greater efficacy at lower compressive loads. What about sit-ups for performance, though? One of the limiting factors to sprinting performance is hip flexion power; however, one must be very careful with direct training for the hip flexors due to the aforementioned spinal compression imposed by the psoas major. Traditional sit-ups are certainly a means of training for both power and strength of the hip flexors, but personally, I use them very sparingly in the programming for athletes. Very simply, direct hip flexion training is not placed at a high priority, as many athletes have more pressing needsmost notably those related to the classical postural distortions referenced earlier. For these individuals, sit-ups simply compound the problem. There are those, however, who can derive benefit from training dedicated specifically to hip flexion. In these instances, I prefer movements that incorporate simultaneous hip extension on the opposite leg and some arm action, preferably in the standing position. Sled dragging and exercises with cables and bands are useful in this regard, as are sprinter sit-ups. As far as Im concerned, most athletes did enough sit -ups in grade school to last them a lifetime; Id rather give them some safer exercises with greater functional carryover to sport. Occasionally, though, Ill write them into programming to offer a bit of novelty. Regardless of the hip flexion exercise, its imperative that the athlete maintains a neutral spine position and braces the abdominals. And, even before undertaking such an exercise, the coach should be considering whether or not that athlete could be doing something more productive instead.

Closing Thoughts One thing that Ive tried to emphasize throughout these two articles is that I want you to think for yourselves when deciding if some of these exercises are acceptable for you. I recall Dr. Ken Kinakin once wisely saying that peopleand not exercisesshould be contraindicated. Be honest with yourself in your evaluation of your own risks, your injury history, your goals, and the cost-benefit ratio should be clear.

10 Training Program Pitfalls How to Spot Terrible Training Programs! by Eric Cressey

Tech note: This article contains videos delivered in Flash. You will need the latest version of the Flash Player (at least version 7) to view them. If you cannot see the videos, please CLICK HERE to download and install the latest player now. It is free, quick, and easy.

I get emails all the time from T-Nation readers who want to know why I don't write programs for the masses. About the only answer I can muster up is: "Because I have a conscience." And because there's no such thing as a successful program for the masses, I'm not sure I'm comfortable trying to write one. While we've had a lot of well-designed programs presented here at T-Nation, they're always going to be inappropriate for some readers. Whether it's injury history, inexperience, lack of familiarity with certain exercises, poor overall recovery capacity, or any number of other confounding factors, something is always going to stand in the way of making a program for the masses suitable for everyone who reads it. While I can't write the ideal program, I can point out common pitfalls in programming in order to help you develop and evaluate your own programs or those that have been written for you by other coaches. So let's get to it!

10 Programming Pitfalls Pitfall #1: Crap Periodization It fascinates me that there are still misinformed coaches using linear periodization in spite of peerreviewed studies and overwhelming anecdotal reports that have proven it to be an inferior source of programming when compared to non-linear modalities. What's even more hilarious is that there are "coaches" using programs right out of rubbish bodybuilding magazines! Linear periodization may be ineffective relatively speaking, but it's been shown that linear periodization is better than noperiodization which is exactly what you see in your favorite professional bodybuilder's 87 set biceps program.

Newsflash to the people still publishing these programs: believe it or not, when readers a) actually care about strength and b) aren't on enough sauce to sink a battleship, it's in their best interests to fluctuate training stress. Oh, and they shouldn't lift in pink bandanas and combat boots either. To build on the "caring about strength" issue, I'm a firm believer that maximal strength is the single-most precious commodity an athlete possesses. This even applies to bodybuilders. Yes, there's something more cherished than thongs, posing oil, and fanny packs. You can't have the strength endurance needed for "traditional" hypertrophy unless you have maximal strength in the first place. And you obviously won't do a very good job of stimulating myofibrillar hypertrophy (the muscle proteins themselves) if you aren't handling enough weight to do any damage in the first place. Athletes in pursuit of peak power must also appreciate maximal strength, as it can have a ceiling effect on increases in power. For these reasons, conjugated and true undulating periodization templates will always blow linear periodization and alternating accumulation-intensification programs out of the water when it comes to long-term progress in trained individuals (I ought to get a few letter bombs for that statement). These latter two approaches altogether ignore maximal strength (and other important strength qualities) for extended periods throughout the year.

Hopefully, the Unabomber isn't a linear periodization advocate.

Pitfall #2: No Planned Overreaching Okay, so now that we know that certain variations of non-linear periodization are superior, it's important to realize that fluctuating overall training stress within these schemes can optimize progress. Some coaches will choose to fluctuate this stress within the week, and others (myself included) within the month. Overall stress may be changed via manipulation of frequency, volume, intensity, duration/distance (endurance athletes), exercise selection, exercise complexity, speed of execution, accommodating resistances, asymmetrical loading, or range of motion. There's no set-in-stone right or wrong way to do

things, but the best coaches will have that sixth sense when it comes to knowing how much fatigue to impose, when to push training stress, and when to back off. Planned overreaching can be extremely effective if appropriate subsequent deloading periods are used, but many coaches turn the entire training year into planned overreaching better termed overtraining in a chronic sense. If you're a coach who insists that you need to push an athlete to puke year-round to mentally harden him, you ought to find a new profession (not to mention a better hobby). Anybody can make an athlete tired; not everyone can make an athlete better, though.

Pitfall #3: Poor Structural Balance Mike Robertson, Dr. Ryan Smith, Alwyn Cosgrove, and I spend a lot of our T-Nation related time fixing injuries. I take the bum shoulders, Mike takes the knees, Ryan the lower backs, and Alwyn just berates people in a Scottish accent until their pride is so beaten down that they forget about their ailing joints altogether! (Kidding, of course. Alwyn really knows his stuff.) These injuries are almost always the result of terrible balance in programming. What's worse, these programming errors are often found in the programs put forth by several prominent Internet gurus. If you want to be a good coach, understand anatomy first. Structure dictates function, and function dictates performance. If you're a "guru" who can't differentiate between scapulohumeral rhythm, lower crossed syndrome, subtalar joint dysfunction, and a fiery case of gonorrhea, chances are that you need to spend less time writing programs and more time doing your homework. Honestly, I'm pretty impressed when many so-called gurus can even distinguish an ass from an elbow. For the visual learners in the crowd, here's a representation for clarification:

Elbow

Ass

Pitfall #4: No Rest/Recovery Recommendations I'd estimate that T-Nation readers from ordinary weekend warrior to competitive, high-level athlete are engaged in strenuous training for three to ten hours per week. That leaves a whopping 158 to 165 hours every week for you to completely "undo" all the progress you've made in the gym. We all know about the importance of diet, and since my last name isn't Berardi, Lowery, or Barr, I won't delve into that here. However, the lifestyle components of recovery beyond diet are just as commonly overlooked as their nutrition counterpart. Christian Thibaudeau outlined a ton of modalities for enhancing recovery here and I went into detail on several recovery session modalities I use in Cardio Confusion. Virtually all methods from massage, to self-myofascial release on the foam roller, to contrast showers, to recovery bloodflow circuits have some merit; I'm not debating that here. I'm just saying that if a coach isn't explicitly encouraging you to engage in some of these activities when he writes a program, chances are you'll miss out on productive training sessions and improved quality of

life. Chances are that he, on the other hand, will be improving his own quality of life by spending the money you paid him for "effective programming."

Foam rolling the IT band

Pitfall #5: Lack of Individualization If you decide to consult a coach and he has a program ready for you in less than an hour, you're getting taken for a cookie-cutter ride. When I'm first contacted by an individual looking for help, I ask him to respond to roughly two dozen questions simply to get the ball rolling. There are usually several follow-ups as well. These questions relate to goals, training history, injury/rehab history, stats (age, height, weight, estimated body fat percentage), body type, dietary habits, problematic exercises, perceived weak points, equipment restrictions, occupation, work environment, and ideal training schedule. I also request that he or she include an overview of their previous eight weeks of training and I perform a postural assessment. Whenever possible (i.e. in-person clients), based on what I see, I'll do manual muscle testing and run them through some simple drills to give me an idea of where their inefficiencies exist. Athletes will always go through some performance testing before I write their programs. If an individual has a cute sister, I'll be sure to get her phone number, too. The point is, the individual and his unique needs matter. Avoid paying good money for cookie-cutter programs.

Pitfall #6: No Consideration of Warm-up Over the last few years, considerable research has demonstrated that the classic "jog a little and then static stretch" warm-up is far from optimal. In fact, static stretching can actually be counterproductive when performed prior to strength and power tasks.

Nonetheless, it's still extremely important to warm up prior to training, and since you need to do it, you ought to choose warm-up modalities that'll give you plenty of bang for your buck. Several options are available, but dynamic flexibility/mobility work is without a doubt the most effective choice. Mike Robertson and I outline over thirty drills we use in this regard in our DVD, Magnificent Mobility. You can also use low-intensity resistance training circuits and medicine ball work for a warm-up. The important thing is that you're getting your body temperature up and dynamically exposing yourself to a variety of movements through full joint ranges of motion. If a specific warm-up protocol isn't included in your program, it's fair to assume that the coach doesn't view it as an important component of your success. In turn, it's fair for you to assume that the coach is lazy, forgetful, or stupid or a combination of the three.

Pitfall #7: No Consideration of Non-Training Activity Earlier, I noted that you'll generally have 158 to 165 "non-training" hours per week. This time isn't just important in terms of recovery work, though; it's also an important consideration because what you do in this time can have considerable physiological implications. A good coach should recognize that what you do at school, work, or just as a recreational activity can profoundly impact your progress. A few examples: 1. The corporate CEO who doesn't realize that slouching in front of a computer all day is just making his neck pain worse. 2. The ectomorph college student who isn't eating enough to make up for the energy cost of walking four miles around campus each day. 3. The pro basketball player who doesn't appreciate that three hours of pick-up hoops in July is interfering with his ability to gain strength and power in the off-season while making his patellar tendonosis worse. 4. The factory worker who spends all day reaching to the top shelf, but can't figure out why his rotator cuff pain hasn't subsided. 5. The teenage hockey player who plays four hours of video games every day, but can't understand why his hamstrings and hip flexors are tighter than a camel's ass in a sandstorm. If these individuals don't reach their goals, the majority of the blame may very well fall on the shoulders of the coach. It's his responsibility not the client's to know what outside activities may sabotage progress.

Pitfall #8: Lack of Exercise Variety Every action in our daily life requires contribution from both the afferent (sensory) and efferent (motor) systems. The afferent system provides our central nervous system with the information needed to consciously or subconsciously respond to a given stimuli. The efferent system, on the other hand, is that actual "get 'er done" component of human function. It's how our nervous system coordinates muscle action. The overwhelming majority of strength and conditioning research to-date has looked almost exclusively at the efferent component, which essentially encompasses all the feed-forward actions that lead to fiber recruitment, rate coding (firing frequency), and summation potential (how many motor units can fire at once, which is also related to how long the fiber is activated). What gets lost in the shuffle is that in human function, none of these events can occur without afferent contribution. Very simply, something has to tell the nervous system what to do before it can do it. So, no matter how efficient your "get 'er done" system is, if the feedback is a bottleneck, you'll never perform up to your potential. So, how does this apply to program design? In a word, variety. Your afferent system will be developed through variety in programming. If you always give the body the same tasks, you'll only get good at responding to those tasks. Given that resistance training is predominantly composed of closed-loop (predictable) challenges, a lack of exercise variety will turn you into a motor moron. How does one avoid going the "all show and no go" route? There are two broad approaches to expanding your motor pool and, in the process, afferent function: 1. Variations on closed-loop skills Use different bars, dumbbells, kettlebells, cables, medicine balls, body weight exercises, grip widths, ranges of motion, points of stability (e.g. lunge vs. squat), etc. 2. Open-loop (unpredictable) skills Certain implements, such as kegs, asymmetrically loaded barbells, and partner-assisted perturbations to balance, can make resistance training an open-loop challenge. I should note that the examples I listed only apply to resistance training, but similar variation can be imposed with respect to training for agility, speed, reactive ability, etc. Your imagination is your only limit. There needs to be enough repetition and frequency of a given drill to allow for adaptation, but one also needs to begin to push variety as soon as possible especially with athletes. Exercise variety will not only

improve overall function in athletes and bodybuilders alike, but also markedly reduce the risk of injury due to pattern overload, muscle imbalances, and movement dysfunction. By the way, for those coaches who want to know where machines fit into this discussion, the answer is: "Stop eating paint chips."

Pitfall #9: No Prehabilitation Just because an athlete isn't injured doesn't mean that he never will be, and it's the responsibility of the coach writing the program to make sure that injuries never come to fruition. Anyone can tell you to bench, squat, deadlift, and do some pull-ups, but the best coaches will write programs that head off common imbalances before they can occur. Whether it's some rotator cuff and scapular stability work, dorsiflexion emphasis, glute activation, or hip abductor attention, these interventions rarely have to comprise a significant portion of your training session. With such a favorable cost to benefit ratio to prehab work, you can assume that any coach who isn't including prehab in his programs falls under the lazy/forgetful/stupid umbrella. Is some horizontal abduction work really going to destroy the integrity of a program?

Pitfall #10: No Single-Leg Work Variations of lunges, step-ups, and split-squats could very well be considered prehab movements; they really are fantastic injury-prevention interventions. Whenever you perform a single-leg exercise (without existing dysfunction), you're naturally promoting balance between the hip adductors and abductors. If they don't fire equally, you'll lose your balance. This component of frontal plane stability is of tremendous importance to efficiency in sport contexts. Athletes rarely encounter positions in competition where their feet are side-by-side. This relates back to the afferent efficiency issue. Give 'em some variety! A common misconception is that unilateral movements can't be effective for strength, power, and hypertrophy development. That couldn't be further from the truth. As I noted in Construction by Adduction, the adductor magnus comprises as much cross sectional area in the "average" thigh as the entire hamstrings group. Given that single-leg movements really stress not only the adductor magnus but also its four synergists in adduction, some unilateral work can go a long way in bulking up your wheels. Factor in that lunge variations are quite possibly the best movements for the entire glute complex, and you'll realize that unilateral work can help to build a big, strong, functional posterior chain. They belong in every program, regardless of the goal.

Core Issues Dispelling Myths and Misconceptions of Abdominal Training. by John Paul Catanzaro

Whether you're on the mean streets of Kansas City or Kandahar, if a kid runs up to you and asks to "see your muscles," you can bet he or she likely expects you to hit some type of biceps pose. The biceps are bodybuilding's equivalent of the military's stars and stripes. A developed set of guns are easy to spot, quick to evaluate, and usually command immediate attention from lifters and non-lifters alike. But while cannonball biceps and horseshoe triceps look great in a tank top, the reality is that a chiseled midsection is the hallmark of the true champion. We all know that big arms can usually be obtained with a steady diet of heavy training, big eating, and dogged determination just ask any Saturday night barstar. But a thick set of pro-caliber washboard abs? That's a whole other level of achievement. The problem is, many bodybuilder's just don't know how their abs function, or how to train them effectively. If your "killer ab workout" consists of 50 crunches performed after your weekly leg workout, then strength coach and kinesiology guru John Paul Catanzaro has some much needed learnin' for you to do. BK More people are concerned about their midsection than any other body part. The core comprises roughly a third of the body, yet it never receives full attention in the gym. Sporting a great set of abs is high on anyone's list. Hey, if the core is in shape, the whole body is in shape! The "want" is there, but the "how" is another story. There exists much confusion on how to train the abdominals properly. This article will dispel many of the myths and misconceptions regarding abdominal training. As you read on, take note on how many of these core issues you have fallen prey to.

Myth # 1: Pressed-Heel Sit-Ups are the bomb as they eliminate hip flexor activation. The Janda sit-up has recently resurfaced as an effective abdominal exercise minus the hip flexor activation. Janda thought he solved the problem of psoas activation by calling on the principle of reciprocal inhibition, which says that the nervous system, as a matter of efficiency, relaxes the muscles opposite the ones contracting. The Janda sit-up was designed to inactivate the hip flexors by contracting the hamstrings and glutes. Janda thought he accomplished this by grasping subjects' calves and having them pull back against his

hands as they attempted to sit-up. The theory was, the hip flexors are inhibited by the contraction of the opposing knee-flexor hamstrings and the hip-extensor glutes. The end result, according to Dr. Janda, is true isolation of the abdominal muscles. Well, according to Dr. Stuart McGill, a spinal biomechanist and professor at the University of Waterloo, the opposite actually occurs! During the Janda (or pressed-heel) sit-up, contraction of the hamstrings causes hipextension, which means that even greater hip flexion (or psoas activation) is required to complete the movement. In addition, bent-knee sit-ups actually activate the psoas more than straight leg sit-ups! This was all confirmed through EMG analysis by Juker, et al., 1998. Solution: Can the Jandas, bent knee sit-ups and other posas-dominant activities in favor of more effective protocols (see below).

Myth #2: Traditional abdominal exercises work the abs through a full range of motion. Not true. The primary function of the abdominals is to flex the trunk from 45 degrees of extension to 30 degrees of flexion. Most abdominal exercises, however, are performed either on the floor or on a decline bench, which is less than half of the range of motion (ROM). Solution: To get at your abs in a full ROM, perform pre-stretch crunches on either a Swiss ball or an AbMat. If you've been toying with these movements for a while and don't feel much benefit anymore, try what I call the Sicilian Crunch. (See the end of the article for instructions.) You must have a solid base of core training before attempting this advanced movement. It's one of those "let's play with the lever arm" type of exercises in which better leverage occurs during the weaker, concentric action and then all hell breaks loose during the stronger, eccentric action. Unless you want to topple backward and send the Swiss ball flying into the juice bar, I'd suggest anchoring your feet under a sturdy support. Also, take advantage of the spherical nature of the Swiss ball or AbMat to achieve full range of motion.

Myth # 3: We are the Hollow Men! The popular act of drawing in the navel or "sucking in your gut as if you're putting on a tight pair of jeans" should definitely be abandoned; unless there's a specific reason to do so (i.e., motor re-education) as it tends to detract the emphasis from other muscles.

It is necessary to keep the core tight without the aid of a belt, but overemphasis on the transversus abdominis (or TVA for short, which is basically the internal girdle that keeps your organs from spilling out) can negatively affect performance. The advice to activate the deep abdominal wall was well intentioned, but unfortunately you can't extrapolate information from a pathological population (i.e. low back-pain patients) and apply it to healthy individuals it just doesn't work that way! I tried this approach with several clients early in my career. The report from most of them was that it felt uncomfortable, almost as if their lungs were being pushed out of their throat while squatting. The body doesn't lie; if something doesn't feel right, don't do it! I remember Olympic strength coach Charles Poliquin once commenting on this practice. "Why rob the neural drive from the extensor chain by drawing in the navel?" he asked. It didn't make sense to me, either. Abdominal & lower back guru Dr. Stuart McGill recommends that you brace the abdominals as if you're about to accept a punch but don't suck 'em in if you want spinal stability. And after adopting this method with my own clients: no more complaints and performance started to improve. Louie Simmons and Dave Tate of Westside Barbell (these guys are renowned for producing world-caliber strength athletes) have stated numerous times that if you want to increase core stability, do the opposite push out your gut! Yet despite all the evidence against it, there are still coaches and personal trainers who continue to endorse abdominal hollowing on practically every movement. Ultimately, the decision is yours. Solution: Don't suck in you gut; brace your abs.

Myth #4: To breathe or not to breathe. Is there even a question? Should you hold your breath throughout a set? Or should you inhale during the eccentric portion of a lift, and exhale during the concentric? Or is it the other way around? Do the rules change if you suffer from chronic halitosis? Forget about it. I think strength coach Charles Staley put it best when he stated that we breathe quite well by instinct alone. Messing around with this could negatively affect performance. I never discuss so-called "proper breathing" when demonstrating an exercise because, like Staley, I feel that it detracts concentration and will negatively affect performance. It's hard enough trying to

concentrate on technique, you just confuse people when you add special breathing instructions. Let it come naturally you'll see that they will naturally hold their breath when they exert themselves. Both McGill and Siff agree that the common recommendation of exhaling upon exertion (or raising of the weight) and inhaling on the lowering is a mistake. Much like the discussion of the TVA and abdominal hollowing, Siff states that the "careful instruction as to the technique of a given exercise will automatically result in the body responding with the optimal muscle recruitment strategy throughout the duration of the movement." This also applies to breathing. Let it occur naturally. Solution: You have distractions in the gym; don't let breathing be another one.

Better Results Requires a Better Ab Workout So now that we know the most common myths and misconceptions associated with abdominal training, let's get down to brass tacks and address what really matters. Step 1: Get your upper and lower abs in order. A classic argument is whether abdominals should be divided into upper and lower classifications. One camp says that they are one muscle there is no such thing as an upper and lower part. However, research has shown that you can selectively recruit different segments of a muscle depending on the type of exercise you do, and how much weight is used.(Antonio, 2000) The lower abdominals have the most complex recruitment patterns and are the weakest; whereas, the upper abdominals are much stronger and easier to train. Thus, perform your abdominal exercises in the following sequence: 1. Lower Abdominals 2. Obliques and Quadratus Lumborum 3. Upper Abdominals Step 2: Take advantage of the abdominals' role as stabilizers. If you want to build a serious set of abdominals, routinely perform the following exercises and their variations: squats, deadlifts, chin-ups and standing military presses. These multi-joint movements require a strong contribution from the abdominals to stabilize the core, particularly when heavy loads are used. It is not uncommon to hear people complain of abdominal soreness a day or two after performing multiple sets with a decent weight of the chin-up or standing military press exercise the pre-stretch will tap into fibers you never thought existed!

Your abdominals act as a natural girdle, or weight belt if you will, when performing all exercises, particularly squats and deadlifts. These muscles act as a bridge between your upper and lower body and are heavily recruited as stabilizers. Isolation exercises like pullovers, curls, and even triceps pressdowns also require a good degree of core stability; however, the loads used are relatively low compared to the big 4 mentioned above. In fact, isolation becomes virtually impossible if large loads are used and, in many cases, the tension developed in the stabilizers will equal or even exceed that of the prime movers! So, you see, the abdominals can be trained quite effectively indirectly as stabilizers. The physiques of top Olympic weightlifters will attest to that. Step 3: Train right for your fiber type. If you've been doing tons of reps of wimpy little abdominal exercises like you're auditioning for Caribbean workout, then it's no wonder that you're stuck in a rut. The abdominals are composed of primarily Type II or fast-twitch (FT) fibers. The Rectus Abdominus, the so-called "six-pack" muscle, is comprised of 54% FT fibers. (Colling, 1997) Here's what I suggest to really tap into these high threshold fibers: pick big (i.e., multi-joint, compound) movements train in a full range of motion (get the prestretch) perform explosive concentric and slow eccentric actions do many sets of low reps using heavy loads make sure you get enough rest between sets

Putting It All TogetherThe Enlightened Man's Ab Routine. You get all that? Well, it was only three steps; so if I did lose you, it also likely takes you three hours to make minute rice. Next time try doubling your Power Drive dosage before logging onto T NATION. Anyway, the following is a sample routine that will target your abdominals effectively and efficiently. No more 50 rep sets for you it's time to start training your core like the ferocious little fast twitch muscles they are. A1) Lean-Away Chin-Ups 6 x 1-3 @ 5-0-X-0, 120 secs. Add weight to chin/dip belt, clear chin at top, lean back as you come down by pushing the bar away and make sure to go all the way down at the bottom. A2) Standing Military Press 6 x 1-3 @ 5-0-X-0, 120 secs.

Clean the weight up to your shoulders, stand with your legs straight (yes, that means knees locked) and arch your back slightly to maximize pre-stretch. B1) Dragon Flag 4-6 x 4-6 @ 5-0-X-0, 90 secs. This is similar to the move in Rocky IV, minus the ambience that training in a barn in Siberia can only provide. Yelling "Drago!" between reps adds to the training effect. Lie on your back on the exercise bench. Your lower body should extend off the bench so that your entire body remains in a straight line. Bend your elbows over your head and grasp the sides of the bench with your hands. Your neck and spine should be aligned and you should be looking directly upward toward the ceiling. Raise your entire lower body upward toward the ceiling. You can point your toes and keep both of your legs as straight as possible. When you reach a vertical position, do not extend your legs any farther. At this point they should be perpendicular to the ceiling and the floor. Tense your abdominal muscles. Hold them this way while maintaining your elevated position. To stay balanced, your body will need your abs to remain very tight. Lower your body back to its original position. To make the exercise harder, stop just short of allowing your lower body to touch the bench. Do not allow gravity to pull your body quickly back to the ground, but rather use your abdominal muscles to gently lower your legs. For a video demonstration, please check the video at right. B2) Sicilian Crunch 4-6 x 4-6 @ 5-0-X-0, 90 secs. Laying supine on a Swiss ball, keep a dumbbell high on your chest as you crunch upward. At the top of the movement when you are sitting upright, extend your arms straight overhead with the dumbbell. Make sure that you have a good grip on itif the dumbbell slips onto your head, it could ruin the set (and your haircut). Then, slowly control the movement downward. Keep your arms slightly bent and in line with your torso while lowering. It should feel like every fiber of your abdominals is ripping apart! Enjoy that feeling as you perform five sets of 4-6 reps at a 5010 tempo (i.e., 5 seconds to lower, no pause at the bottom, 1 second to raise and no pause at the top), taking three minutes to rest in between each set. Try to keep the total time under tension below 40 seconds and really exaggerate the eccentric action in a slow, smooth, controlled manner.

If you would like to finish off with a couple of sets of Ab wheel rollouts for as many reps as possible, be my guest. Make sure to work the legs and back/hip extensors during another workout. Rolling out of bed the next day should offer an unpleasant surprise! Nothing in strength training is engraved in stone, but if you want your abs to look like they were chiseled out of rock, be inquisitive. There exist far more myths and misconceptions about abdominal training than any other body part. To find the real answers, you must address the core issues!

Freakish Strength With Proper Core Training by Jesse Irizarry 3/02/2012 We've all heard it from strength coaches, training partners, even the old jacked dude in the corner who squats five plates on an easy day.

"Keep your core tight. Tighten up your abs."

Okay, what does that even mean?

Are they just saying suck in your gut, or is there something special about this core-tightening thing? And if so, why give a rat's ass if your weightlifting goal is to be comparable to a barbarian who crushes his enemies and hears the lamentation of their women?

The often-missed point of keeping a tight core is to stabilize the spine. If you're constantly hurting your back, this is for you. I've seen lifters hurt their backs from just bench-pressing because they had no understanding of spine stabilization.

Before you tune out and write this off as another pre-hab article, pay attention to this proper spine (core) stabilization coupled with breathing techniques can actually help you lift more weight and improve performance.

Learning to properly contract the core and use intra-abdominal pressure is what separates the guys who are pretty strong from the ones who are freakishly big and strong. The Core Defined

Your core isn't just the washboard that you see in the mirror, or in most cases, the bag of laundry that hangs from your midsection.

Along with the abs in the front (rectus abdominis), it includes the internal and external obliques, the transverse abdominis, quadratus lumborum, and psoas major, extending down to include the hips/glutes and up to include the pelvic floor and the muscles by the spine called the multifidus and erector spinae.

Some core muscles are more superficial and are classified as global muscles involved in spinal movement. Other muscles are classified as local muscles, which are deep and specifically involved in stabilizing the spine.

For movement to occur anywhere in the body, force has to be transferred through the core.

Stabilizing Techniques The most common techniques to stabilize the spine for preventing injuries and achieving greater levels of strength and performance are hollowing and bracing. Hollowing is derived from drawing in, and is performed by trying to draw your belly button in to your spine. You'll hear some say to find a neutral spine first. This technique has been used in rehabilitative settings to teach patients how to activate their transverse abdominus and internal oblique correctly. These are the local muscles involved in stabilizing the spine. Abdominal bracing, on the other hand, involves contracting both your anterior abdominal musculature and your low back muscles at the same time and bracing, like you were about to get hit in the stomach. Some accompany bracing by pushing the abdomen out. This involves the use of the obliques to produce a more stable and powerful contraction. A study done by Grenier and Dr. Stuart McGill showed that abdominal bracing is better than hollowing and a purely observational study conducted by yours truly found that fitness "professionals" who talk about finding a neutral spine and drawing in while squatting usually never squat above 225 pounds. Learning from Doing Bracing is a technique learned in the gym or on the mat. When a fighter goes to strike, he instinctively immobilizes his trunk to a degree, braces his midsection, and swings his limb.

When an experienced powerlifter or informed gym rat gets ready for a maximal lift, he forcefully pushes his belly out and arches his back hard to keep it tight.

What he's doing is contracting his anterior abdominal wall and low back muscles simultaneously, creating a perfect brace. It's a technique acquired from putting your time in.

Looking at this method, it's important to emphasize that sticking your gut out does not create a stabilized spine.

Some physical therapists teach to actively force the abdomen out while others don't. I find it helpful to push out my abdomen when lifting heavy, but I also remember to actively contract the entire abdominal and low back areas as well as the hip musculature.

I've found this addition to be the difference between hitting a new PR and bombing out, or finishing those last two reps and failing before my potential was reached.

Learning Pelvic Floor Contraction

This full contraction can also include pelvic floor contraction.

A technique used to teach the full co-contraction of core bracing is to pull your pelvic floor upwards. This is similar to the kegel exercises that women practice while pregnant or that adolescent boys try in hopes it will give them a little more staying power in bed when they get to play with a real live girl.

To practice true pelvic floor contraction, imagine finally getting an opportunity to take a whizz after drinking a big cup of strong coffee along with a gallon of water during your hour-long commute to work. Now imagine you had to stop midstream. That feeling is pelvic floor contraction.

To practice a full brace with pelvic floor contraction, squeeze your glutes like you just sat on a tack, perform the pelvic floor lift, and brace your abdominals, obliques, and low back muscles like you were about to get hit.

Rest a second and repeat.

Obviously when you start throwing plates on the bar you're not going to be thinking about stopping a piss stream, but the big guys in the gym do it without thinking.

Does Your Core Work for You?

Have you ever seen someone bend his back squatting as if he were trying to kiss his shoelaces? He's doing so because of poor mobility and a lack of core strength, but working on core strength after restoring mobility is an oversimplification.

Spending too much time without adequate mobility and stability often results in a faulty core stabilization pattern. Adding core strength to a bad pattern won't necessarily fix the problem.

There are exercises that help fix this patterning, but just like strength training and bodybuilding, they have to be practiced. It's also best to add them in after you've first established adequate hip, ankle, and thoracic spine mobility.

The following exercises teach anterior and posterior core stability in the saggital plane as well as rotary and lateral core stability in the transverse and frontal planes.

The first three basic exercises are the curl-up, the bird dog, and the side plank. These movements have typically been used as an introduction to formal strength training after an injury or long hiatus as they recruit the proper pattern in an unloaded state.

The curl-up pattern helps if you have difficulty stabilizing while bending and teaches you how to resist excess extension of the spine in the anterior plane:

The bird dog helps if you have trouble stabilizing in trunk extension and teaches you to resist lumbar spine flexion in the anterior plane:

The side plank teaches you to resist lateral flexion in the frontal plane:

These should always be progressed to more dynamic and loaded movements. For example, a progression that trains you to resist lumbar extension in the anterior plane is the rollout:

A progression to teach resisting excessive spinal flexion in the anterior plane includes hip extension movements like the deadlift, while the suitcase carry teaches resisting lateral flexion in the frontal plane dynamically:

Rotary stability, which involves resisting too much spinal rotation, is also an important part of core stability that's been receiving considerable attention.

Exercises to train this include cable chops and landmines.

Why Even Care About these Exercises?

I'm sure you've seen 'that' guy, the one who can do front, side, and one-fingered planks on a half-deflated Bosu ball. He can hold this for an hour with perfect alignment, but if you ask him to do a deep squat he literally can't despite perfect ankle, hip, and thoracic spine mobility. What's the problem?

He has no dynamic stabilization. All that core strength in a stationary position doesn't mean he can stabilize himself during movement.

Bottom line is, it's wise to spare yourself a similar frustration and learn a couple of techniques that will save you time and energy in the long run.

Controlling Breathing

Breathing techniques can and should be coupled with bracing to allow for better performance. The bracing techniques discussed above won't help you lift more weight if there's no increase in intraabdominal pressure.

Spinal stability is generated partly by diaphragm activation.When pressure is increased in the abdominal cavity, it helps support the spine and works against the compression forces of axial loading (the kind of loading in a squat or standing shoulder press).

Without intra-abdominal pressure created by breathing in air against a braced abdominal musculature and forcing the diaphragm down, true spinal stability can't occur.

The classic breathing technique used is the Valsalva maneuver.

The idea behind this is to create intra-abdominal pressure, which is meant to lead to a greater production of force and stability.

Perform the Valsalva maneuver by breathing deep into the lungs (which are down near your abdomen, for those who still think making your chest and shoulders rise is taking a deep breath), then holding it and forcing the air against a closed glottis.

To learn how to breathe into the lungs and create that intra-abdominal pressure, you can practice something called crocodile breath. Lie on your stomach with your face resting on the back of your hands. Now breathe deeply so that your low back rises instead of your shoulders and upper back. You want to feel your abdomen pushing against the floor and expanding out sideways. Practice a few times and you'll get the idea. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

There are a few drawbacks to this type of breathing pattern. It can seriously increase blood pressure and restrict blood flow back to the heart. This can be harmful to anyone, let alone someone with a history of heart problems.

Because of this, it's recommended that the Valsalva not be held more than a few seconds to ensure blood pressure doesn't increase dramatically.

Why even use this technique? The opposite idea of breathing out during a heavy lift has been shown to compromise spinal safety. Furthermore, the Valsalva can improve performance in everything from getting a new PR to aiming a gun.

If this isn't for you but you're still looking to create intra-abdominal pressure and brace your core, you can also use forced expiration. Easily explained, this is done by sniffing in air against a braced core and blowing out some air against a braced abdomen on the working phase of the lift.

Conclusion

Everyone wants to learn the newest program, lifts, and techniques to wow the treadmill bunnies and stand above their friends. It's wise to first take a step back though and look at the champions in any sport I guarantee you'll see that they all share an obsession with practicing the basics that produce results.

Don't believe me? Just ask that 50 year-old grey beard squatting a Mack truck what's more important, the newest advanced periodized squat program or knowing how to arch your back and "keep your damn core tight"?

The Cardio Roundtable, Part 1 Featuring Charles Staley, Christian Thibaudeau, Lonnie Lowery, PhD and Don Alessi Moderated by Chris Shugart There aren't many truisms in the fitness and bodybuilding community. However, one thing can certainly be set in stone: If you want to be lean, muscular and healthy, you must do cardio! Or is it. If you want to look good naked, whatever you do, don't do cardio or you'll lose all your muscle! No, wait, I think it's. Cardio is the key to a great body! Or perhaps. Cardio is overrated garbage! Oh hell, I forget which "absolute and irrefutable fact" is correct. It seems there are both experts and idiots on both sides of this cardio conundrum. I've always thought the answer lies somewhere in the middle. The only way to figure it out is to try both extremes and see what happens. Over the years I've overdone the cardio and I've avoided it completely. Through trial and error, I found out what works for me. Luckily, you don't have to go through this whole process. Why? Because gathered here to talk about the pros and cons of cardio are four of the smartest guys on the planet when it comes to fitness: Charles Staley, Christian Thibaudeau, Dr. Lonnie Lowery and Don Alessi. Here's what they had to say when we sat down to discuss everyone's least favorite form of exercise. Chris Shugart: We probably need to start things off with a definition. Most of us use the word "cardio" very loosely. What are we talking about exactly when we say that? Lonnie, why don't you define it for us so we're all on the same page. Dr. Lonnie Lowery: Actually, I've never liked the word "cardio." It's a misnomer for many bodybuilders. The term implies an attempt to increase cardiorespiratory function when most guys are actually just trying to maximize fat loss. Having said that, let's define "cardio" as aerobic activity geared toward gaining peripheral adaptations like increased cell "fat burning" capability (mitochondrial density) and vascularity (capillarization). Of course, there are less direct and more anaerobic approaches to reducing fat deposits while developing muscularity, like HIIT, but more on that later. Shugart: Thanks, Lonnie. Guys, here's something I've noticed over the last few years. When I first got into this whole fitness/bodybuilding thing, cardio was king. You had to do cardio. Cardio was thought to be superior to weight training for the general population. You weren't really even "fit" unless you ran five miles every morning. The pendulum, in other words, was all the way over to the right. Then, the pendulum began to swing to the other side. For many in the bodybuilding community, cardio became the catabolic devil. It was thought to not only be unnecessary, but downright harmful if your goal was to gain muscle. The pendulum had swung far, far to the left. What's your take on this and where is that pendulum now? Christian Thibaudeau: I'd say that we're definitely getting closer to a balanced position. Many coaches who were "anti-cardio" are now realizing that some form of conditioning work offers their athletes a lot.

Some die-hard "pro-cardio" preachers are now slowly integrating more high-intensity exercises into their programs. I don't believe that we'll ever reach a point where everybody agrees on that subject though, simply because we all have different backgrounds, beliefs, and goals. But at least we're getting to a point where we can look at what another coach or athlete is doing and say, "I won't do that, but I understand what he's doing and agree that, for his goals, it's okay". Shugart: What do you think, Don? Don Alessi: I don't care much about trends or where the pendulum is now. Anaerobic, resistance athletes learn quickly that excess cardio zaps strength, mass, power and quickness and even promotes excess fat! As far as John Public is concerned, well, where are those "fit" runners now? Broken down and fatter! Worse yet, some are disillusioned with the entire fitness industry as a whole. Shugart: Nothing I hate seeing worse than some otherwise skinny guy with a pot belly running his flabby ass off every morning. If only we could score points by running them down with our suped-up hotrods, just like in Death Race 2000! I'll put tommy guns on my Toyota and we'll all adopt cool nicknames like Shotgun Shugart and Lawnmower Lowery and Oh, sorry, I totally geeked out there for a second. What's your take on the cardio pendulum, Lonman? Dr. Lowery: I think the definition of fitness itself needs to be clarified first. Classically, fitness is defined by five components. 1. Cardiovascular endurance (like a marathoner would exhibit), 2. muscular endurance (like a boxer or wrestler would have), 3. muscular strength (e.g. a powerlifter), 4. flexibility (e.g. a martial artist), and 5. body composition (e.g. a bodybuilder). It's important to understand that the elite in any given sport are generally less "fit" across the board (regarding a balance of the above components) than even a serious recreational athlete might be. For example, a powerlifter excels at strength but suffers in the cardiovascular department (VO2 max) compared to a marathoner. Therefore, your historical observations about what constitutes a "fit" person are astute. Both popular culture and academic exercise physiology really focused upon the cardiovascular portion throughout the eighties and even nineties. Only relatively recently has resistance training gained more widespread acceptance. Still, countercultures like the anti-aerobic backlash leave parts of the fitness definition lacking. Regarding the "pendulum," it depends on one's goals, body type and yearly training periodization schedule. Are you trying to add mass to a thin, ectomorphic body or rip-up an already thick physique at all costs? To me, aerobic activity isultimately a necessity for maximum muscularity, whether it's done just two or three times weekly for thirty minutes during mass building phases or almost daily for an hour during ripping phases involving purposeful negative energy balance. I don't want to get ahead of myself, but the catabolism fear stems from excessive negative energy status and cardio sessions that are too intense and prolonged. When sessions are kept to a low-moderate intensity, there's less risk of excess cortisol release, protein loss and glycogen depletion. Fat mobilization and oxidation (as well as GH release) can still be stimulated, however. Charles Staley: I think things are coming back to a rational center. No matter what the argument, the truth is usually somewhere in the middle. Aerobic exercise has a place for those seeking improved body composition, but less of a place for those seeking maximal strength and power. Shugart: Okay, here's something that's always bugged me. I hear many speak out against cardio, then recommend GPP work, energy systems training, no-rest weight training circuits, etc. But isn't that all basically "cardio"? Alessi: If you want to generalize, then playing an energetic game of Xbox is basically cardio. See, just like the question, the confusion is because of the lack of specificity. All exercise systems have general

similarities. Cardio denotes cardiovascular conditioning of the heart and lungs and their role in managing cellular function or in gym talk, your "wind." So you gotta ask yourself how much of and what type of wind you need for a very specific outcome. Thibaudeau: First of all, I think one problem is that we get either confused on the terminology we use or we get stuck on static concepts of what's what. I don't like the term "cardio" either; it's way too general. It's obviously an abbreviation of "cardiovascular exercise" and basically means a form of training that improves cardiac efficiency/health. But if you think about it, any exercise that leads to a significant increase in heart rate and energy expenditure could be included as "cardio" work. People often confuse "cardio" and "aerobic work." Don't make that mistake! You can get an elevation in heart rate and a significant energy expenditure (thus an activity that could be classified as "cardio") without involving the aerobic pathway to produce your energy. In that case, you can be performing "cardio" without actually doing an aerobic exercise. That's why I coined the term "energy system work." Now we can classify exercises according to how we produce energy to sustain the activity. It thus becomes easy to select the method best suited to our needs. Energy system work (or ESW) can be divided into three categories: 1. Anaerobic alactic work: Activity of very short duration (less than 25 seconds) and very high intensity: short sprints (shorter than 150m), plyo drills, heavy lifting, etc. 2. Anaerobic lactic work: Activity of short duration (25 seconds to 3 minutes) and high intensity: medium to long sprints (150-800m), bodybuilding-type lifting with short rest intervals (Charles' EDT program being a prime example), conditioning circuits, etc. 3. Aerobic work: Activity of relatively long duration (at least 12 to 15+ minutes) and low intensity: jogging, biking, etc. Note that there's a gap between anaerobic lactic and aerobic work (3-12 minutes). In that case, the energy demands are from both sources. GPP is a recent buzz word (despite the fact that it's been in use for over thirty years). It stands for General Physical Preparation and simply refers to an exercise developing organic conditioning (whole body general fitness/conditioning) while not being specific to the main sport or activity. As a result, GPP can include pretty much any exercise involving the whole body. It's only a matter of how you're using it to get a good systemic effect. Shugart: Very nice answer, Christian. People would never guess we're conducting this roundtable in a strip joint or that you were receiving a lap dance from "Big Bambi" while you gave that answer. Anyway, what's your take on this question, Charles? Staley: Any exercise modality can be either aerobic or anaerobic, depending on how you structure the loading. In fact, my university thesis was entitled "Effects of a sixty minute bout of cow-tipping on physiological and psychological variables in post-pubescent males with acute Tourette's Syndrome." Basically, the study has been criticized because about 34% of the subjects had to withdraw due to injuries; nevertheless, what we found was that virtually anything can occur at any point on the energy spectrum. Of course, some activities lend themselves better to aerobic loading than anaerobic and vice versa. Shugart: What about the no-rest weight training circuits, Lonnie? Dr. Lowery: It's my experience that aerobic exercise is best left as a separate entity from resistance training, at least when one's physique is the only consideration. It's physiologically and psychologically appropriate. Trying to get big muscles with reduced rest intervals and (by definition) lighter weights, flies in the face of the specificity principle. That is, the body adapts specifically to the stimulus applied. Weight training circuits may be more efficient (some cardiovascular endurance plus some muscular

endurance plus some hypertrophy) and convenient, but won't maximize hypertrophy like heavy weights. Shugart: Good point. I'm going to throw out some very general questions now and let you guys duke it out. Here we go. What's better for the average guy wanting to be lean and muscular? HIIT (high intensity interval training) or long bouts of jogging at one pace (low-intensity)? Staley: Clearly the former. There's really no debate on that. And you don't need a university degree or advanced physiology textbooks to understand why this is so: when you expose your body to repeated long-duration excursions, your body wants to weigh less in order to become more efficient at doing what you're asking it to do. And the easiest way for your body to weigh less is to catabolize muscle (which of course, weighs more than fat). Shugart: What do you think, Coach Snippy? Alessi: If they're a qualified HIIT trainee, that is, under the age of 35, without a pre-existing heart condition or family history and have at least six months prior training experience, then it becomes a simple energy game (calories in, calories out). For that, HIIT burns more calories in less time. Shugart: HIIT or jogging, Thib? Thibaudeau: Well, the only thing you have to do is compare the physique of a sprinter to that of a marathoner. Which one is leaner and more muscular? The sprinter of course! In fact, sprinters, as a group, have a better body than 95% of all the people spending hour after hour in the gym. This is all the more impressive considering that most sprinters will strength train three, maybe four times per week using only basic movements such as the bench press, squat, the Olympic lifts and hamstring work. Of course, one could argue that the top sprinters are genetically gifted for leanness, strength and muscle. However, put the same guys on a hefty regimen of long distance running and chances are the quality of their physiques will vastly decrease. This is not to say that low-intensity aerobic work is to be avoided. However, it shouldn't be abused. Let's face it, as T-men we like to shout high and loud that aerobic work isn't manly. But the fact is that aerobic work does offer several benefits, including the shift toward a better lipid profile, a lowered risk of cardiovascular diseases and hypertension, as well as fat loss. So aerobic work isn't the Devil; however, it's not the fastest route towards a muscular and lean physique. In my opinion, long sprints, 200-400m (even 800m) with short rest intervals are best when it comes to losing fat while minimizing the potential for muscle loss. Most people wanting a great physique should engage in this type of activity. Furthermore, a recent study concluded that 400m running actually involves the aerobic energy system and lead to improvement in max VO2 similar to long, slow-pace aerobic work. That being said, slow-pace aerobic work isn't to be discounted as it offers several health benefits. I know that health is always something that bores the athletes to no end, but good health is important: you can't improve if you're in the hospital can you? Shugart: Good point. Lonnie? Dr. Lowery: The way you posed that question makes for a difficult "right" answer. In short, either approach will work for an average guy wanting a little of each (some leanness and muscularity). Again, I prefer 100% specific, usually heavy, weight training sessions of 45 to 60 minutes for the muscle building, and then either 20 to 30 minutes of treadmill or 45 to 60 minutes of straight treadmill separated from the resistance exercise by at least four hours. The treadmill session is scarcely even a workout, per se, for any intensity-crazed bodybuilder. Burning fat can be done at intensities that are low enough as to not interfere terribly with muscle recovery (e.g. a nonpanting ten-second heart rate in the low 20's for a college-age male).

I respect the different approaches (HIIT vs. slow-and-steady) as equally valid but I'm old school in that I believe the crossover effect (burning fat at lower intensities and shifting to mostly muscle glycogen use at high intensities) can be manipulated to the bodybuilder's advantage. Slow-and-steady is a more direct and specific method for reducing subcutaneous body fat without interfering with muscle building efforts. Shugart: I think I went anti-cardio for a while there because I got sick of people using it as a crutch to support their crappy diets. My thoughts were, hey, maybe if you didn't eat junk all the time you wouldn't have to do an hour of cardio per day! Do you guys see people abusing cardio in this manner? Thibaudeau: Oh yeah, I've seen it. A very good friend of mine actually behaves in this manner all the time. He'll sit on the stationary bike for 30 to 45 minutes just so that he can party all night guilt-free. Obviously you can decrease the negative impact of lousy nutritional and lifestyle habits with training. Burning more calories will enable you to eat a bit more without gaining too much fat. In theory, if you use 1000 more calories per day you could eat 1000 more calories without gaining fat. I say "in theory" because it assumes that those 1000 calories come from foods that make you look good nekid, not grease burgers, ice cream and pizza. However, if you think about it, cardio actually burns very few calories. Did you know an average individual would need to jog for close to two hours to expend 1000 calories? And we're talking about a relatively fast jogging tempo here. For most people, expending 1000 calories can actually require close to three hours of activity! Considering that a medium-size pizza has close to 3000 calories in it; that an average cheeseburger has anywhere from 400 to 600 calories; a medium portion of fries around 350 to 400 calories and a medium soft drink 200 calories, you can see that an average fast food meal would require you to do anywhere from three to six hours of jogging! And that's only to prevent fat storage! As far as our "party dude" is concerned, it's interesting to note that a regular beer can have anywhere from 140 to 240 calories per serving. If our beloved dude drinks only one or two beers he can get off easy. But if he drinks seven or eight beers (the minimum amount which allows him to believe that he actually has a chance to score with one of the many vixens at the bar), we're up to a whopping 1000 to 2000 calories! Considering that a good party is rarely complete without an after-hour binge, nothing short of a marathon would actually prevent the damage done on the body as far as fat gain is concerned. Dr. Lowery: Well, as supportive as I am of exercise as a cure for Western society's obesity problem, I certainly agree, Chris, that it can't replace a carefully planned diet. One can control his energy balance and body fat with "junk food plus cardio," but he's still missing out on the bevy of health benefits specific to varied nutrient intake including whole natural foods. Like Christian said, health is a consideration too! Being lean loses some of its luster if you're counteracting some of the health benefits with high-trans fatty acid, low-fiber, poor-micronutrient, low-phytochemical diets. I used to know runners and cyclists who'd actually brag about their junk food diets. "Oh yeah, I live on hot dogs and cheese crunchies" Whatever. They couldn't see beyond their present leanness to big issues like nutrition-related chronic diseases later in life. Shugart: Very good point. And nice use of the word "bevy." We should all try to use that word in a sentence today. Charles, what do you think? Staley: Sure, you're better off eating properly. My rule of thumb is this: if your goal is to improve body composition, any activity that burns calories is a good thing as long as you can recover from it and it does no harm. The problem is, protracted aerobic work seems to be catabolic, as I mentioned earlier. Doing "cardio" to counteract a poor diet is robbing Peter to pay Paul. Shugart: And Paul Chek doesn't care where his money comes from, trust me! Here's another gripe of mine: I hear from athletes who practice basketball three hours a day and then say, "Oh, now I have to go get my cardio." Isn't the basketball game "cardio"? It's like some people don't think they're doing cardio unless they're on a machine in front of a TV at the local gym! Also, if I'm keeping my rest periods short and therefore my heart rate up during weight training, is extra cardio even needed for fat loss? Comments on all of this?

Staley: Okay, when you find an athlete with that attitude, you're talking about what I call a "fatigue seeker." It's not all bad; these people have great work ethics and they love exercise. That can get you a long way (as opposed to lazier people). But it's hard to gain or even preserve muscle this way! Only quality (read: high intensity, anaerobic) work builds muscle. Quantity must always be subjugated to quality. Shugart: What say you, O tanned one? Alessi: Generally, additional cardio is overkill and contraindicated unless it's only a technical (skills) practice. If an athlete is over 7% fat, then two to four HIIT sessions per week will aid in fat loss, specifically waste removal. If under 7%, then one session every six days will maintain high VO2 and capillary/mitochondrion density. It's primarily this cellular metabolism that's not conditioned or even made worse with an interval weight workout. Also, venous, return flow, back to the heart i.e. stroke volume diminishes somewhat with the weight interval system. Thibaudeau: The all-time best quote I've ever heard on the subject was made by Dennis Leary. Basically he made fun of individuals who would drive thirty minutes to the gym only to walk for thirty minutes on the treadmill! "Have we turned into gerbils, ladies and gentlemen?" Leary said. For some odd reason, people believe that if they're not doing it in a gym, it won't work! According to Kino-Quebec (a Canadian organization responsible for promoting health and physical activity), a game of soccer, basketball, racquetball or squash will actually lead to a greater caloric expenditure per minute than jogging on the treadmill or doing the Stairmaster! In fact, the former will be approximately 25% superior to the latter in that regard. Now, another thing that sickens me is when people talk about walking to promote fat loss. How many times have I seen some out of shape guy (or gal) walk twenty minutes on the treadmill expecting to lose fat like crazy? Did you know that washing your car, dusting your furniture and playing pool has approximately the same caloric expenditure as walking (about four calories per minute)? Housework will burn more fat than walking! Try this one when your wife complains about doing all the work around the house! In physical training, like with most things in life, what you get out of it is proportional to what you put in. If your heart rate increases a lot, is maintained at a high level for a relatively long time, and you use a lot of energy, you'll get some fat loss, conditioning and health benefits. In that regard, intense weight training with short rest intervals can actually have a better effect than walking and even jogging. Strength training alone will not give you the same cardiovascular effect as intense cardio or energy system work. It won't get you ready to run the Boston marathon, but it will give you significant health and fat loss benefits. Now, not all strength training exercises will lead to same energy expenditure. For example, a one-arm concentration curl won't make you use as much energy as a power clean, push press, squat, or deadlift! Basically, the more muscles involved in an exercise, the more energy will be used: the bigger the engine, the more fuel you use! Shugart: I use that same line when talking about my penis. What's your opinion on that issue, doc?

What's Dr. Lowery's opinion of Chris' penis? Will our panel come to a consensus on the subject of cardiovascular training for fat loss? Stay tuned for part 2 in next week's issue of T-mag!

Shugart: I use that same line when talking about my penis. What's your opinion on that issue, doc? Dr. Lowery: I don't have an opinion on your penis, Chris. Shugart: No, I mean the question about outside-the-gym cardio.

Dr. Lowery: Oh, that! Great point about those who don't consider other energy demands. If, for example, I mow the lawn for an hour, then walk across town with my wife, why would I go put in an hour on the treadmill? I've already expended hundreds of calories! Of course, this approach carries the risk of missed "cardio" sessions for lazy guys. Moving one piece of furniture for the wife, then opening a stuck jar of peanut butter for her doesn't count, if you get my drift. Shugart: I used to think sex was cardio, but my last girlfriend said it was more like a one-rep max. Bitch. Okay, a couple of loaded questions: What's the best form of cardio and what's the ideal time to do cardio? Some say after training, others say in a separate session apart from weight training. What do you think? Thibaudeau: Best form of cardio? An evening with Trish Stratus after a triple dose of Tribex! Seriously though, the best form of energy system work is the one you'll actually do! I could say that 400m sprinting with very short rest intervals is the best way to shed the fat. However, how many people will actually have the guts to stick with 400m sprints? Not many! Its just about the hardest thing you can do as far as physical training is concerned (a close second is sets of twenty reps on the squat or deadlift). So even if its great, if you dont stick with it, it wont work. Staley: I like short bursts of maximum effort interspersed with adequate rest periods (usually a 1:3 work/rest ratio works great). Activities that involve impact (like running) may burn more calories because they cause more microtrauma the repair process burns more calories.

The best time of day is highly individual. While there are studies suggesting optimal times to perform various types of physical activities, usually this benefit is offset by other factors. For example, you may read that anaerobic work is best performed early in the morning, but if that interferes with work or family obligations, it may not be worth it. Optimal training must be viewed within the context of your life as a whole.

As for performing "cardio" separately from weight training, yes, that's the ideal scenario from a physiological standpoint, however, as I alluded to earlier, there are other factors to consider as well. Dr. Lowery: I've already tackled the issue of when and how intense, I think. Regarding the mode of the exercise... not the bike! Why do bodybuilders obsess over it? Not only does one burn fewer calories on an exercise bike during a given session compared to natural walking or jogging, but he's also concentrating the exertion mostly onto his quads, which could cause some loss of leg mass due to hampered recovery (personal observation). I think uphill walking at three miles per hour on a treadmill at a heart rate between 120 and 136 beats per minute rocksfor direct fat loss while minimizing interference with muscle recovery.

Alessi: I recommend exercises that work the arms and legs concomitantly and if qualified, involves jumping. My favorites include jump rope, rowing ergometer, elliptical with arm motion, and bike with arm motion. Shugart: It's been said that athletes training for pure strength and power should probably do no cardio at all since cardiovascular exercise can interfere with strength development. Agree or disagree? Alessi: Disagree. As mentioned previously, for in-season training, one forty-minute cardio session every six days will maintain optimal VO2 levels while strength and power are being maximized. This is more important in Olympic lifting than powerlifting or bodybuilding. Staley: All absolute statements are faulty, and this one's no exception. From my experience, measured amounts of aerobic work (like twenty minutes every three to four days) can improve recovery. Think about it this way: intense muscular efforts (heavy weight training) can be viewed as "anti-circulatory" (because intense muscular contractions can temporarily shut off the muscle's own blood supply), so mild aerobic exercise can counter this and facilitate recovery. Shugart: Interesting point. Thib? Thibaudeau: Well, it all depends on the type of "cardio" we're talking about and the capacities of the athlete. A super-heavyweight powerlifter or Olympic lifter who loads heavy on squats would be ill advised to go out jogging for thirty to sixty minutes, that is unless he has a spare pair of knees at home! However, I feel that most strength athletes would benefit from getting into better general shape. Most powerlifters and Olympic lifters have a very low work capacity. Its true! As a result, it's much harder for them to recover from a certain training load. On the other hand, a super conditioned athlete can handle a much higher volume of strength work. The more strength work you do without overtaxing your body, the more youll progress. Most powerlifters at my gym cringe when they see the program that my hockey players do. Most of them couldn't finish half the weekly workouts! But not only do my players finish every session, they progress at every session. Why? Simply because they're well conditioned! Their bodies are used to handling physical stress. So they can do more strength work, they recover faster, and thus they progress faster. Most of my players will put on anywhere from 50 to 100 pounds on their squat, bench press, and power clean in four months of training. Some have even improved more than that! So in that regard, I believe that its important, even for a pure strength athlete, to get in good shape. Now, the choice of activity will depend on the athlete. I find that sprint work with short intervals and sled dragging are the two best options for strength athletes.

Dr. Lowery: Overall, I agree. At least in terms of treadmill, stepper, cycling, distance swimming, etc. We're back to the specificity principle here: committing one's physical resources toward different stimuli and presumably very different adaptations leaves less for pure strength. These individuals are probably better served by cyclical volume training with moderately heavy weights and "accessory work" in the name of overall conditioning. Shugart: Okay, a person is trying to lose fat. Should he do cardio first thing in the morning on an empty stomach? Alessi: Yes, if you have the luxury of time choice, then early morning, empty stomach training with caffeine and Power Drive works best. If a bodybuilder is looking to drop a weight class, then PM is better as they can afford to shed both muscle and fat. Separate cardio sessions from weights work best when sport specific energy pathways are being developed, for example, vertical jump. Staley: Hmmm, I'm starving, half-asleep, my joints feel like they have sand in them....um, no, not a good time for cardio! Look, seriously, when you do it is secondary to doing it in the first place, right? Also, isn't that idea predicated on the theory that if your glycogen supplies are low from an overnight fast that your body is more likely to go after stored bodyfat for fuel? Well, the only way your glycogen will be low enough to accomplish that would be if you're low or no carbing. And if you're low or no carbing, then your glycogen is always low, and you can do your cardio later in the day when you feel at least half alive!

My good friend Alwyn Cosgrove has a great argument for why morning cardio on an empty stomach is a faulty idea: everyone always extols the value of eating every three hours to prevent catabolism; so if this is true, why would you do hard exercise after an eight hour fast? I mean, it's either one way or the other, right? Thibaudeau: Thats hard to say. I dont really like the term empty stomach. It would be mor e appropriate to say "on an empty gas tank" (as in "depleted glycogen state"). Like Charles said, the logic for morning cardio is that if you have no glycogen available to produce energy, you'll readily dip into your fat stores to fuel your body. However, one thing that many people forget is that this could also increase the rate of protein breakdown (catabolism). Furthermore, I've not seen any evidence that doing aerobic work first thing in the morning leads to a greater proportion of fat being used to produce energy. Dr. Lowery: Truthfully, I do cardio in the morning. A thinner, ectomorphic guy looking to harden up shouldn't though. He'd be better served by time under the weights while drinking protein and carbs throughout. I tend to favor fasted treadmill work because I've seen firsthand how much more dramatic fat oxidation can be in this state during lab experiences.

The liver is mostly depleted of stored carbohydrate (glycogen reserves approximate just 90g which keeps us alive at night), there's a natural diurnal release of GH upon rising, and even cortisol is higher upon waking. This latter fact is dangerous for muscle loss but actually facilitates lipolysis (fat breakdown). Admittedly, I've been experimenting with about five grams of glutamine and even about ten grams of protein in this otherwise "fasted" pre-breakfast state. I do fear cortisol and hope to counteract any unnecessary catabolism without interfering with lipolysis. Shugart: Since most people don't have the luxury of training twice per day, should cardio be done before or after their weight training workouts? Alessi: After. Strength training or weight work is the single most valuable component so it should be prioritized and done first in a program. It's been determined with several studies from biomechanics, metabolism and function that absolute body strength (as determined by the squat or deadlift) is the single most important factor in any trainees program or quality of life. Staley: If you've established the need to do it in the first place, then for the most part, cardio should be done after. Here's why: if you perform aerobic exercise immediately prior to strength training, the fatigue residue will negatively affect the strength workout. However, if you reverse that, then the fatigue created from your strength training will give you a "head start" on your aerobic workout. Dr. Lowery: I agree after. Muscles and liver are somewhat glycogen depleted at this time, which may hasten a shift toward fat oxidation, and one's endocrine profile (such as GH and adrenaline release) is already primed for fat loss. Conversely, who wants to pre-fatigue themselves systemically with cardio when that freshness and energy is better applied to heavy weights? Thibaudeau: I vote for after, too, especially if strength, size and power are more important to you than being lean. I really dont think that riding the bike for thirty minutes or running a series of 400m right before a squat workout is all that smart! Shugart: Oh my gosh, you all agreed on something! Let's try another one: how much cardiovascular exercise is too much? Are there any signs? Thibaudeau: You wake up one morning looking like Richard Simmons! Seriously, there are several signs to look for: having the feeling of flat muscles, loss of strength, feeling light-headed when you stand up, and loss of appetite. For strength athletes the best sign is probably a decrease in strength and power. As such, a good test to conduct is the vertical jump. Test yourself every morning; if your results go down 5 to 10%+ for more than three days in a row, you may be doing too much aerobic work. Shugart: When does cardio cross the line, Don?

Alessi: When you feel the urge to wear a headband and matching socks to the gym! Seriously, one sign is a sudden increase in mid-thigh skinfold to a greater thickness than the subscapular site. This indicates a drop in free Testosterone and a rise in local fat substrates (stored around the thigh). Other signs: a sudden loss in max strength, power or speed; the inability to progress on a strength, power or speed program, even with adequate calories and rest; and increased duration in morning joint soreness. For most bodybuilding and strength/power sports, ten miles or ninety minutes per week should be a maximum limit. Dr. Lowery: It's tough to generalize due to body type differences, androgen status, etc. but I'd limit HIIT to 20 to 30 minutes per session and steady-state treadmill work to 45 to 60 minutes three to four times weekly. I'm a proponent of doing no cardio whatsoever on otherwise "off" days. During self-abusive, emaciating contest dieting, one might need five or six days of cardio weekly. Even in the most extreme conditions, at least one day of total rest is crucial. The parasympathetic type of overtraining is related to aerobic exercise when total training volume is too high. Depressed maximal heart rate and high RPE (ratings of perceived exertion) come to mind. If one feels too fatigued and exhausted to get enthusiastic about weight training, he's already gone too far. Biologically, a loss of more than half to one pound of body mass per week is another indicator of overdoing cardio and negative energy status. Staley: I'd say one thing: if you find yourself at the sporting goods store deliberating over whether or not you should pick up one of those strap-on flashing light gizmos to prevent yourself from getting hit by a car, you probably need to taper off the cardio a bit!

If you'd like a more serious answer, look at the results: are you doing tons of cardio and getting leaner? If so, who am I to tell you to stop? People need to do more testing: measure your current status, then perform a program, then re-measure. What were the results? Shugart: Dr. Lowery, how about post-workout nutrition after a cardio-only training session? Any guidelines? Dr. Lowery: Fluids are important of course, with most guidelines calling for as much water as can comfortably be drank (perhaps 250 cc) every 15 to 20 minutes during aerobic exercise. Often such guidelines are convoluted by carbohydrate replenishment schedules however, so just replacing fluids to prevent acute weight loss (maybe 500 cc/ hour of cardio) is appropriate. Thirst is a lagging indicator of hydration status, so stick to the 15 to 20 minute schedule. It should be kept in mind that a sports drink contains carbs that interfere with fat oxidation, especially if consumed within an hour prior to the cardio.

As far as post-workout carbs, that depends upon one's goals. If maintained performance is a focus (it usually is), 50 to 100 grams of high glycemic carbs within two hours of the exercise is important. For those not wishing to replace the calories spent, this could be cut in half perhaps 25 grams 30 minutes post-exercise and another 25 grams 90 minutes post-exercise. This isn't enough to replace glycogen stores however, and wouldn't be a great option if weights preceded the "cardio." Just-exercised muscles demand substantial protein and carbs post-exercise for maximal growth, as we all know. Post-cardio protein could be set anywhere from half of the post-exercise carb intake to roughly equal that of the post-exercise carb intake. Then again, just following a regular eating schedule every two to three hours will bring protein into the picture, though, eh? Shugart: True. Okay, let me close with another observation that perhaps sums all this up. It's interesting to talk about cardio timing, the best form of cardio etc., but for me, what it really comes down to is this: do something! Call it cardio, GPP, energy systems work, speed golf whatever. Just move your body, get the ol' ticker pounding and break a sweat. A little cardio, when not taken to extremes, has a bevy of health benefits, plus you'll look better with your clothes off.

Thanks Christian, Don, Lonnie and Charles. It's been enlightening!

The Stimulant Roundtable Featuring Cy Willson and Anthony Roberts Moderated by Chris Shugart

Psychologists theorize that our personality types dictate what kinds of recreational drugs we're more likely to use. Personally, I'd rather be up than down. Pass the stimulants, hold the depressants, please. I'm not alone either. We Americans love our stimulants. In a fast-forward society of workaholics and busy bees, we always want to go just a little faster. And before you get all Nancy Reagan on me, remember that your morning cup of coffee (or six) contains a powerful stimulant banned by many athletic organizations: 1, 3, 7-trimethylxanthine. You probably call it caffeine, you dirty druggie. In this article, I sat down with Cy Willson and Anthony Roberts to explore the world of physical and cognitive stimulants. The results were, well, stimulating.

Chris Shugart: Let's talk stims. First, let's discuss our own history with them, what we've tried, and what we currently use. Get us rolling, Cy. Cy Willson: I was essentially addicted to ephedra/ephedrine products for a good five or six years. While the euphoria was great, I found retrospectively that I was actually less focused the majority of the time, paranoid, and suffered a great deal of anxiety. That really took a toll on many of my relationships. I think for myself and most people that are already anxiety-prone, it's a bad choice.

Today, I'll use Spike on occasions where a great deal of focus is required, but other than that, I generally go with around 200 mg per day of caffeine and some green tea. Shugart: I hear ya on the ephedrine addiction, but like most people, my first stimulant was caffeine. I got hooked on coffee my freshman year of college in order to survive a 7AM summer class. Years later, while on a bowhunting trip, my buddy gave me my first tab of ephedrine, a Mini-Thin it was called. You had to get it at truck stops. It blew my mind. I was jittery and I missed all my shots that day, but man, did it ever wake me up! Of course, I crashed hard soon after and felt like dog meat.

I later graduated to ECA (ephedrine, caffeine, and aspirin). I used it for fat loss, but I mainly liked it for its stimulant properties. I tried clenbuterol but felt God-awful on it. I tossed what I had left in the garbage after a week or two of using it.

I also tried some "smart drugs" I picked up in Mexico, but I didn't notice much of anything. Oh, and once a friend of mine gave me a snort of... well, I'm not sure what it was, but I tooted it up my nose anyway. I was stimulated, but it was an ugly, paranoid high. I tried to write and couldn't, then I tried to train and couldn't stay focused. That was it for me and the "dark side" of stimulants. Today, I look for something a little more refined and advanced. Ephedrine is pretty crude and I always adjusted to it quickly anyway. So these days I use Spike, which is mainly thiamine di(2methylpropionate) disulfide. I like it because it gives me a powerful mental boost as well as a physical one. I actually use it before I write, too.

One tablet of Spike gives me what I call a "crisp mental hum," a very clean stimulant buzz. Two tablets and I'm flying a very smooth and long-lasting stimulant rush, which makes other stimulants seem uneven and, well, dirty. I get no jitters from Spike but I have a "Bring it on!" attitude in the gym. My mood is great when I'm Spiked up, I can juggle multiple mental tasks, I never feel a "crash," and it makes me want to spend the day in the squat rack. Anthony, how about you? I have a feeling you're going to be official "crazy motherfucker" of this discussion.

Anthony Roberts: Probably! I first used stimulants in my training regimen when I was about 15. There was this product called Dymetadrine 25 which was basically just 25mgs of ephedrine in tablet form. I used it pre-workout, which was good because I was essentially working out for hours on end, following the bullshit I'd read in the popular magazines of the time. Around that time I also experimented with Ultimate Orange. This was a Dan Duchaine inspired pre-workout drink/stimulant, back in the day.

I eventually graduated to a version of the ECA stack called "Herba-something-or-other," which I used three times a day to cut weight for high school wrestling. After that, I used some pretty dodgy stuff, including basically all the nootropics on the market. None were great "stimulants" per se, although based on the strength coach I was reading at the time, I was convinced they'd help me acquire motor skills for my new sport (rugby) more quickly. Maybe they did, maybe they didn't. I don't really know. I moved back to ECA during my later college years basically every spring to get cut for the summer (embarrassing). Somewhere during this time I must've tried every major brand's version of the ECA stack, which was typically some brown powder in a cap. The advantage of this over a tablet is that you can taste the powder about half an hour after you take it, and no amount of water gets the taste out. I think brown dust actually came out when I sneezed or burped! I even used a popular drink mix that contained ECA. Apparently someone thought it would be great to have an ephedra flavored pre-workout drink. It was not, in fact, a good idea. In my mid-twenties, if there was a stimulant I could swallow, shoot, smoke, or snort, I tried it. I even used injectable epinephrine before a workout, as well as ammonia caps, when going for max lifts. Some of my more (ahem) interesting adventures with stimulants eventually led to my serving six and a half months in prison. Those are the type I no longer do, obviously. ECA is still the old standard that I use. I've used clenbuterol, but just don't like it as much as ECA. Recently, however, I've replaced the No-Doz in my morning ECA stack with Spike. By doing this, I've been able to cut down the E/C portion considerably, and really only use those components sparingly now. Shugart: Anthony, what's this about shooting adrenaline? You're kidding us, right?

Roberts: No, I'm not kidding, but I guess it's not as dramatic as it may sound. I had a friend who had access to what's called an "Epi-Pen" which is basically for allergic reactions. Essentially, it's adrenaline.

So I figured I'd shoot a bit before a workout and see how it affected me. Basically it does what you think it would: it makes you all jittery and hopped up. I could see strongmen using it for competition or maybe a powerlifter before their deads in a meet, but other than that I'm hard pressed to think of a use for it, unless you're competing for half a day like those guys. Shugart: Speaking of that, is it possible to get over-stimulated before lifting or before an athletic event? Cy? Willson: Absolutely. There can always be "too much of a good thing" and stimulants are certainly not an exception. At one dose of a particular compound, you may experience a mild euphoria or elation, almost feeling somewhat peaceful, more focused with an increase in thought flow, and a sense of not being able to become fatigued easily. Going above that particular dose, however, you may then experience excessive CNS stimulation and become easily distracted, have a short attention span, become irritable, and suffer psychomotor agitation. Your flow of thought may be increased, but it'll be all over the place. Some people might even experience tremors and muscle twitching. Now, applying those clinical effects to what you'll see anecdotally, I'm sure many will think of a few cases they've witnessed or experienced themselves. One I've witnessed was a case where a guy had been working his way up to a 350-pound bench press over a period of time. About two weeks prior to his max day, he was easily pressing 340 for three or four reps, yet when the day finally came, it was very obvious to me that he was all over the place.

He was pacing back and forth, couldn't hold a thought, was easily distracted and, in general, just very anxious and nervous. Keep in mind this is a very calm person who'd never acted this way on a max day.

Time came for him to start working his way up to his potential max and I could see that he was certainly suffering from excessive CNS stimulation. A quick sign to me was his extreme and abnormal shaking while taking the weight off the rack with lighter weights such as 185 and 225. He simply couldn't focus and was so nervous he was barely able to press 315 pounds. I finally asked him if he had taken anything. Sure enough, he told me he'd taken 75 mg of ephedrine and 400 mg of caffeine along with three grams of tyrosine. I finally gave him some orange juice with some lemon and some crushed ascorbic acid to speed the clearance of ephedrine. Three days later he maxed out once again and this time without taking anything other than one caffeine tablet and hit 360. I'm sure many will recognize similar events. I can recall guys being convinced that taking certain stimulants at a certain dose was going to help them blow away their 100 meter and 40 yard times, yet they had their worst times ever. Roberts: Yeah, as with anything else, it's possible to overdo a good thing. Stimulant provided strength and coordination (as well as focus) follows an "inverted U-shaped response curve," meaning that you take a certain amount and your physical and mental abilities peak at that (optimal) dose, and decline when you go over it.

Shugart: What about the Law of Diminishing Returns? How does that relate to most stimulants? Willson: Well, with many of the compounds, you're looking at what's loosely called "tolerance." In short, you experience a diminishment of response from the drug with repeated use.

This could occur via pharmacokinetic (e.g. increased expression of a metabolizing enzyme) or pharmacodynamic (e.g. down-regulation of a particular receptor or interference with downstream signaling) means. As a result, you must continue to ingest more of the given compound to experience the desired effect. Roberts: Yes, you definitely get a diminished return with stimulants, whether we're talking about anything from clenbuterol to ephedrine to caffeine. This is where you take enough caffeine to write a term paper and pull an all-nighter, and when you first sit down to write the paper, you're sharp and you're focused. Two or three pots of coffee later, you're a jittery mess.

You see it with ephedrine too, where you take enough to get up for a workout, but if you take too much, you get all shaky and risk early neural fatigue during training. You also get less of a result as time goes on. I call this the "tall > grande > venti-effect." This is where you go to your favorite coffee shop, and for awhile, you get the smallest cup, but after awhile, you graduate to the largest cup they have, and you're drinking two of them to feel any kind of stimulant effect. Sooner or later, you're tired without the addition of caffeine to your system, and you need it to function properly. These are the people who are at Starbucks at 8:45 am, standing in a ten person deep line, who have no chance of making it to work on time, but are still standing there, watching the counterperson handing out cups of coffee like they're looking at Nino Brown handing out crack. Shugart: Okay, I've heard stories of pro-bodybuilders snorting coke before training. But I've also heard about guys smoking pot before training. I just don't get the latter, unless it has something to do with pain reduction. Anyway, what are your thoughts on both of those pre-workout "rituals?" Roberts: Well, the world of anabolics is, unfortunately, very much tied in with a lot of those other recreational drugs like pot and cocaine. We all know Craig Titus went to prison the first time for ecstasy

or "E." (Note: I went to prison for possession of ecstasy, on a first time offence, with zero priors.) A few years ago a fitness competitor died from hyperthermia related to E, and we all know that certain bodybuilders and even supplement company owners are very into it. Nubain is another example of a pre-workout ritual that a lot of bodybuilders use to "kill the pain" of working out, or whatever. Basically, they were just using it recreationally. I remember one professional here in Jersey who placed eighth at the NOC and was basically addicted to it for a year or so.

As for pot, I do know of a lot of bodybuilders who smoke daily (mostly regional title holders and such, not too many professionals). They usually claim that it helps with pain or appetite stimulation, which has enough medically sound support to not be an outrageously absurd claim. Still, the typical lack of aggression most people experience with the use of pot makes it a very poor preworkout choice. In addition, it has potential side effects like possible infertility and making people actually enjoy the Grateful Dead.

Cocaine and methamphetamine are probably the more "common" stimulants used before training. The only time I've really heard about their use is in pre-contest dieting, in the final week or two. At that point, typically, it would be methamphetamine (crystal meth or it's cheaper version, speed) being used over cocaine, because its effects are longer lasting and it's less expensive. Clearly, although this does go on, it's not a great idea.

Willson: I think both pot and coke are obviously a bad idea. I'd hope I wouldn't have to explain why cocaine shouldn't be part of any person's life. As far as the marijuana, perhaps they use it because of the potential analgesic effect, but I suspect there may be other reasons. I've actually heard most guys claim that they use it because it allows them to "focus" so much more and feel the contraction so much better. The latter would fit in with a classic response reported in those with a low level of intoxication, that is, heightened sensory awareness. Unfortunately, available data indicates that if anything, marijuana would hinder a workout as there's supportive data for a muscle relaxant effect and it can cause somnolence (drowsiness.) In cases where there are high levels of intoxication, decreased muscle strength, decreased motor coordination, and poor concentration have been demonstrated. Now, as far as why I think many may actually use it prior to training... This is going slightly off topic, but I think many do so either for the euphoria or the decrease in social inhibition. I think many require a euphoric state in order to tolerate getting back into the gym in cases where they're otherwise depressed or are dreading the monotony of another day in the gym. Or, going back to the decrease in social inhibition, I think many seem to have social anxiety prior to gaining a great deal of muscle and afterwards contrary to what they thought it actually increases. Consequently, some may turn to marijuana and find it useful. This, however, is a poor choice as there are legal prescription drugs available to help with this issue.

Now, ignoring my pseudo-psychiatric explanation above, yes, perhaps it's for the potential analgesic action of marijuana or its active constituent. This certainly fits with the scenarios I've seen when it comes to guys becoming addicted to narcotic analgesics (e.g. hydrocodone, codeine, oxycodone, propoxyphene, etc.) because they're trying to work through an injury. They begin using the drug in order to get through training sessions when they should simply be taking some time off. This then later escalates to using the drug in order to help them get to sleep (likely from the resulting pain from worsening their injury). It can be pretty sad situation thereafter. It also seems that a good number of guys abuse benzodiazepines to help them get to sleep from the stimulant abuse. The only crazy story that comes to mind would be a rather large guy who for about a month-long period would consistently come in to the gym reeking of alcohol. We'd worked out together a few years prior, so I decided to ask him why he had taken up drinking recently and why he did it prior to training. He told me that he did so because he'd been told that Arnold did so. I told him I'd always thought that Arnold did so after training and that I was pretty sure it wasn't every single day. Some of the things that people do and their reasoning simply amaze me. Shugart: You promised you wouldn't tell people about my pre-workout tequila problem, Cy. Bastard. Okay, it seems that some stimulants are also great for mental tasks studying, writing, test taking, concentration, memory, creativity, and anything that requires improved cognition. Other stims, like ephedrine, may keep you alert while driving late at night, but they suck as "brain candy." Why are some stimulants good for thinking and others not?

Roberts: Well, although most of the stimulants we use for this purpose act on the sympathetic nervous system, some can cause a reaction in people that's similar to situational stressors that cause the "fight or flight" response. This response is a reaction designed to give your body the extra strength, speed, and endurance needed to overcome (or get out of) a possible life-threatening situation. In certain cases, having this kind of stress on your body for prolonged time periods can cause anxiety and has the ability to mess you up on certain cognitive tasks. Ephedrine is a great example of this. It's alright for pre-workout use, and you may be easily able to focus on your lifts when you're on it, but you aren't going to be able to write or perform complex or creative mental tasks very well. This is due to its ability to stimulate the beta receptors, and this unfortunately results in a subsequent (temporary) cognitive impairment. Caffeine can also activate the sympathetic nervous system, but due to its adenosine receptor antagonist action, it's actually going to cause an increase in cognitive function. You see, while ephedrine relies on its ability to agonize your beta-receptors to cause its stimulatory effects, caffeine actually depends on its ability to reduce adenosine transmission in the brain to achieve bodily stimulation. So, caffeine will improve cognitive function and ephedrine won't, although they're both stimulants.

This is also why ephedrine is a better fat burner than caffeine. Beta receptors are found en massein skeletal tissue, while Adenosine A(1) and A(2A) receptors are expressed in the basal ganglia, a nice little mass of gray matter that lies embedded within the white matter near the base of each cerebral hemisphere of the brain. Specifically, caffeine acts on so-called "projection neurons" located in the striatum part of the basal ganglia, which is thought of as the main receiving area of the basal ganglia. It's this interaction with adenosine receptors in this area that makes caffeine a good choice for improving cognitive function.

However, the action occurring primarily within skeletal muscle tissue is how we burn our fat, and thus ephedrine is a better choice than caffeine for that purpose. Willson: Well, there's some conflicting data when it comes to what may or may not improve cognitive function out of these stimulants. Having said that, I personally think that those that have cholinergic effects are the most desirable when it comes to cognition. For example, the main active ingredient in Spike has been shown to have positive cholinergic effects. As for caffeine, by antagonizing those adenosine receptors, caffeine is thought to stimulate cholinergic neurons in the basal forebrain. It's via that mechanism as well as inhibiting GABAergic neurons involved in sleep promotion that caffeine stimulates wakefulness. Nicotine is also thought to increase attention and vigilance by directly stimulating cholinergic neurotransmission in the basal forebrain. On the other hand, in cases where the compounds simply have noradrenergic and dopaminergic effects, I think one is more likely to simply experience a wakeful state. It often amazes me that many people will go through the trouble of understanding that small alterations to a steroid molecule can produce drastically different biological effects, yet they ignore the fact that many of these psychostimulants are completely different molecules and can have very divergent mechanisms of action (though they often share some pharmacological similarities). Shugart: Okay, what's the best way to use caffeine for workouts? How much and when do you take it, and in what form? What I do is avoid caffeine at all other times in the day, then, only before training, pop a generic Vivarin tablet. Any other thoughts on this? Willson: I simply purchase the 200mg caffeine tablets and will split them in half. I'll take 100mg prior to workouts along with some green tea. If I didn't experience such severe withdrawal effects after discontinuing use of caffeine, I'd use it every third day if not less in order to preserve many of the benefits from the drug. The reason being that tolerance to the psychostimulant effects of caffeine has been demonstrated to occur rapidly, like within a couple of days after initiating use. Roberts: Avoiding caffeine all day is a very good idea for sure if you want to take it just before a workout as your primary stimulant. Now, me, I'm the worst sleeper in the world. I wake up about ten times a night, and by about 4AM I'm already brewing a pot of coffee and trying to shut my eyes until around 6AM when I feel justified in jumping out of bed and downing the entire pot along with a handful of ephedrine.

But hey, that's just me, and there were mornings in my life where I didn't take it as easy as I do now, and did stuff to wake up that I probably shouldn't even mention... But back to good 'ol caffeine, yeah, avoid it until you're ready to workout, then take a generic No-Doz (200mgs of caffeine), or if you want faster absorption, you can take it in a liquid solution form (called "coffee"). Shugart: What's this I hear about nicotine being a great brain booster/stimulant? I know the Japanese have even added it to energy drinks... Roberts: Well, my theory on this is that the Japanese have added it to energy drinks for other reasons... Look, it's like this, I don't smoke, but I couldn't care less if someone in a bar is smoking, alright? But now, you can't do that in New Jersey, where I'm from. So what's being done is that the bars are now carrying those "energy drinks." And a lot of major energy drink manufacturers are adding nicotine to their formulas and promoting them as mixers with Vodka or whatever. But yeah, nicotine is a pretty potent cognitive enhancer. The Nicotinic systems in the hippocampus play important roles in memory function, and in fact, a reduced nicotinic receptor concentration is associated with severe cognitive impairment, like that seen with schizophrenia and Alzheimer's disease. Nicotine and nicotinic agonists are strongly and positively correlated with improved memory function, and even have a strong anti-depressant effect.

I work with a very good figure competitor who's training to qualify for nationals. At about 12 weeks out, when her carbs were lowered severely, we added in some Spike to her supplement protocol. At about four weeks out, during severe carbohydrate and caloric depletion, we added in a transdermal nicotine product for its localized anti-estrogenic and fat-burning effects, but also for its ability to help her focus at her job during the day. Willson: Well, I won't debate the idea that nicotine could be used for those purposes, but I think it's really a poor choice. Nicotine is a very addictive substance, which upon cessation of use can potentially cause a bout of depression. Furthermore, it can significantly increase cortisol levels, which you certainly don't want on a chronic basis. Another potential concern for bodybuilders and athletes it that it's been shown to decrease total sleep time and sleep efficiency as well as prolong sleep latency and decrease REM sleep in humans. Last but not least, it may also contribute to the formation of cancer. I think people seem to make the mistake of thinking that because they're not using a tobacco product and simply the nicotine, that carcinogenic effects aren't an issue. Shugart: Cy just takes the fun right out of it, doesn't he? Seriously, interesting stuff, guys. Thanks for the chat!

The Most Overlooked Stimulant by Christian Thibaudeau

When it comes to supplements, the biggest "sleeper hit" of all time is Power Drive, a neurotransmitter product designed to boost physical and mental performance.

This supplement has become a secret favorite of professional and Olympic athletes as well as college students who use it to cram for an exam or when taking important tests that require them to be mentally "on." Despite all of this, Power Drive is often overlooked. And you know what? That's a darn shame! I believe that Power Drive is one of the top five supplements of all time. So why is PD so often overlooked if it's so good? Well, for starters it's not a "kick in the pants" supplement. It doesn't contain caffeine or ephedrine so you don't "feel" it a whole lot, at least at normal dosages. When people don't "feel" a supplement, they often believe (erroneously) it's not doing anything in their body. Another reason PD is often lost in the shuffle is because (at normal dosages at least), it doesn't give you a pronounced single effect. It often seems that we only notice the big ass effects and neglect those little things that really make a huge difference. It's true that Power Drive doesn't have a single pronounced effect, however, it does have a myriad of smaller benefits which can add up to a significant difference not only in your workouts, but in your life in general! Power Drive not only makes you a better lifter, it makes you a better

human.

Mental Performance and Psychological Well-Being This is Power Drive's most underrated benefit. Most people want something that makes them stronger or bigger, not something that makes them simply feel better. Too bad for them! I believe there's a strong correlation between feeling good and performing well. When you feel confident, well-grounded, and focused, you have a much greater chance of athletic success. Besides improving your mood, Power Drive has several benefits as far as mental performance is concerned: improved memory, more focus, a higher level of alertness, faster information retrieval, and more effective adaptation to stress. In fact, Power Drive should be sold as a nootropic agent a genuine brain booster!

Physical Performance Improved functioning and more readily available neurotransmitters invariably lead to better motor performance because, after all, all motor commands (except reflexes) must originate from the nervous system. Power Drive gives you a double physical performance punch: it increases performance indirectly by improving CNS function and mood, and also directly via the activity of Ginko, DMAE and LTyrosine!

Summary I define Power Drive as a whole-body enhancer. It can significantly improve many psychological, mental, physical, and even sexual capacities. It doesn't hit you over the head like caffeine or Spike when it comes to felt energy, but for those of us who want to supercharge our whole body it's certainly a good choice.

What the heck is Periodization anyway? This article was originally written for and published on Reactive Training Systems, home of Mike Tuchscherer.

What the heck is Periodization anyway? I don't watch TV. At least not in the amount I used to. I am not old either. Somewhat I feel that I should spend my time reading the stuff that interests me and watching more documentaries, which I do. Also, I need to reduce my Facebook time and internet dating too. But, that's life, right? So, I was watching this extremely good lecture on Biology and Human Behavior by Robert Sapolsky (author of the famous book Why Zebras don't get ulcer? ) and the author goes into the problem of categorical thinking. He showed that categorical thinking (Sapolsky mentioned light continuum as an example, and how we humans mark certain parts of the continuum as separate colors, although the borders are fuzzy) improves memory (classifying and categorizing things is what I usually do the best and helps me put the things at their own place), but at the same time it reduces the ability to recognize similarities between different categories and differences within categories. In other words, it reduces your ability to see the forest from the trees. I am not saying categorical thinking is bad (Sorry officer, but the light was greenish, not reddish!), but it has some flaws during some specific situations (everything is about the context). I guess we should be more pragmatic and not dogmatic, and use categorical thinking when appropriate and/or fuzzy thinking (the truth is a matter of a degree) when that is more appropriate. People usually ask me whether I use linear periodization, linear progression, or conjugate periodization with my athletes. I dont know. In real life it is hard to put things into categories, and the truth is very context dependent and usually in the shades of gray. What I do is pick up a pragmatic solution to a particular problem (athletes characteristics, performance/outcome goals, context) based on the knowledge and previous experience. I am trying to use my brain instead of being dogmatic and/or use certain dogmatic categorical solution. I guess, it is similar to learning how to fish compared to getting a fish. So, instead of just getting/buying the fish, I get a decent lure, so to speak. That means being pragmatic finding a solution to a problem by analyzing what you have, what you want to reach and within what context, taking into account knowledge of management, theory of training, biomechanics, physiology, motor learning, psychology, training effects and previous experience and other 100 dangerous words. Even if I said that people need to be more pragmatic I will again return to categorical thinking and try to explain my thoughts on periodization. So, what the heck is that word that my Word spell checker keeps marking as typo? Yes, I am talking about periodization. I know some coaches who love to coach about coaching and they are 21. If you really want to know about coaching go to someone who has coached for 30+ years under the following criteria that make him good coach: 1. Consistently produced champions over years with the same athlete pool and within same environment as his fellow coaches Consistently improved average performance of all of his athletes with the same athlete pool and within same environment as his fellow coaches Consistently doesnt screw up the athletes, their mental health and health in general (it is easy to succeed as athlete/meat grinder when you have huge pool of talents somebody just have to succeed no matter how much of them you destroy; some athletes continue to dominate in spite of their training) I am not that kind of coach. Hopefully, I may become that kind of coach one day if God is righteous. So, honestly, what do I have to offer? Yes, I read a bunch of books, finished Faculty, worked with some Olympians (which were Olympians before I re alized that strength training doesnt make you

2.

3.

slow and bulky), but I am at least honest here. There was a time during my faculty years where I thought I knew something and I wanted to write about it. Now, the more I know, the more I know I dont know. Sounds confusing? Try reading Socrates. What I want to say, it that now, compared to before, instead of trying to hunt fame by writing on internet message board and forums about what I have read, I now seek experience and fulfillment working with real athletes and seeing them improve. I guess I am getting older and wiser. Basically, what I want to cover in this article is categories I use in my pragmatic solutions. Yes, complementarities between pragmatism and dogmatism, categorical thinking and fuzzy logic. This is called squiggle sense and there is a book about it called Complementary Nature .Get it. The goal of the coach is to manage the Athlete Preparation System, a technological process so to speak that brings the athlete from point A to point B under certain amount of time and under a given context. This Preparation System can further divided to (1) Training, (2) Competition and (3) Recovery.

Coach needs to juggle with much more components (like budget planning, recruitment, assessment and evaluation, talent identification, legislative issues, etc), yet these three are the most crucial for the discussion on periodization. In my opinion, there are three separate, yet connected phases in organizing of the Athlete Preparation System (APS): (1) periodization, (2) planning and (3) programming.

You can look at this as Zoom Levels to the problem, like a Google Earth: Globe, USA, New York. This way we can see the forest from the trees. Periodization level. Periodization level compromises of defining what you have, where you want to be and when (goals) and context. Basically, periodization level of organization is seeing the big picture. Defining competition dates and competition calendar, number of peaks and their durations, basic evaluation of athletes, amount of performance increases (performance goals), outcome goals, analysis of

previous seasons, tests, meets and everything else that precedes more concrete planning. It is also important to take into account weather, available facilities, training camps, available budget, etc. To keep this achievable, it is necessary to have training theory knowledge and experience (well, duh!). Knowing the athletes, discipline and analysis of previous season, along with the knowledge of theory of sport form and having realistic goals in term of performance increase will guide you to devising optimal number of peaks and their durations and/or optimal competition calendar. Planning level. When we set up the big picture with previous level, now we have to further analyze what we have and how to get the things done. That means planning the journey to your realistic goals that were set up in previous phase. Knowledge of the factors that are underneath of the performance and thus outcome goals (technical skill, tactical skill and decision making, physical preparation, psychological or mental preparation, character and team culture, strategy and game plan) is of crucial importance here. Planning of the development of mentioned factors should be based on scientific principles and theory of training. You can basically set up goals for each of these factors of success and preparation components . When deciding what to do and when, you can basically utilize two different planning strategies. Suppose you have the three jars you need to fill with certain amount of sugar, salt and water. In the first case you can fill the jars with equal amount of sugar, water and salt, or for nerds 33,3% of each.

You can decide to put more of each at one jar, and /or less in another, like in the following picture.

Please note that you have certain amount of sugar, water and salt that you can/should use. Another option is to organize the content of the jars in different way basically putting all the water, salt and sugar in certain jar, like depicted.

What you can change with this strategy is the order of the jars or fillings. Certainly there is a continuum between these two cases, where you can mix and match different amounts of the sugar, water and salt. There is infinite number of possibilities. Now imagine the following the jar size can be different or change over time, some of the fillings that goes inside the jar mix better in a given amount, there are different amount of fillings available or certain cap and/or threshold that need to be in a given jar. Yes, I know this complicate things. Why did I mentioned the jar example? Because jars can be considered periods of time defined by Periodization Level, while the salt, water and sugar can be considered amount of training load aimed at achieving certain goal also defined by Periodization Level. See, Periodization level defines number of jars and the fillings along with their characteristics, but Planning Level goes into finding the best possible organization of the fillings and the jars. In real life example, lets say you want to improve speed, strength and endurance for a given amount under given time. How would you approach this problem? How would you mix and match the fillings in the jars? To do this correctly or better say optimally coach need to know certain interconnections of the fillings (training components that develop certain performance factor needed to reach performance and outcome goals) and the effects of the filling in one jar to the another. He also needs t o define the best number and size of individual jars and the best fillings. Here comes the theory of training, theory of training effects (especially cumulative, delayed and residual effects), physiology, etc. I am getting sick of jars, yet I still need to continue to use this hypothetical example. If you are still here, we call these two mentioned strategies Mixed-Parallel and Block approach with a huge continuum in between. Historically, mixed-parallel approach originated first, although some of the internet gurus still try to push that sequential approach (Block) originates first, which creates a huge confusion which I will try to solve in couple of pages. So, mixed-parallel approach, sometimes also called concurrent or traditional, originated first. Athletes were utilizing all of the training components and aiming at improving all the factors of success at once (in given time frame, which can be defined differently from system to system, like same training session, same training day, one week, etc). Basically, putting salt, water and sugar in same percent amount in all the jars. The problem with this approach, is that with advanced level athletes, certain amount of sugar, water or salt was not enough to bring up or increase a given performance factor. So, the coaches tried to push more and more of each into a single jar. In reality, jars can become bigger and bigger over time (the size of the jar is actually a work capacity of the athlete) but there is a final size that can be reached. The characteristic of those programs was huge amount of training load, which could be sustained only by drugs. Some of the coaches and sport scientists saw this limitation and started thinking in different ways of filling the jars, without breaking them by overfilling. Tha ts when they invented block approach, or filling the jars with different percentages. Again, some of internet gurus think that block approach is overfilling of the certain jar with certain filling, but it is not (or at least not always). Total amount of fillings (training load) is lower compared to mixed-parallel approach, but level of certain filling in a given jar is bigger. We call this concentrated loading, which is basically concentrating certain amount of available filling in one jar, compared to spreading it equally to all jars. Experience showed that filling the jars in this way, by concentrating it, improved aimed success factors in the advanced athlete without killing him or utilizing drugs. There are also couples of methods of progressing from one concentrated loading phase to another, namely (1) abrupt or sharp transition and (2) smooth or gradual. Another term for the second strategy is conjugated-sequence system, that utilize couple of other principles (like superposition of training effects) other than smooth transition.

For sure, there are much more details and principles underneath and the interested reader is directed toward the recommended sources at the end of this boring article. One thing I should also mention is that for some reason, to reach certain success factors there should be more details in the filling. For example, having a sugar is not enough we need to differentiate between brown sugar, honey, splenda, etc. Here lies the Devil in the details. In real life, this means difference between strength training for team sport athlete (just give me sugar please!) and strength sport athlete (what kind of sugar and in what combination?). Programming Level. No really, enough of jar examples. We are now clear that with Planning level we organize training components and training factors aimed at improving certain performance goals at certain time defined by Periodization level. I guess that is clear enough explanation. What we do in Programming level is programming (well, duh!) and determining progressions for each training component or training factor defined by Planning level. We do that by manipulating (1) training load, (2) training methods and (3) training means and taking into account training effects (especially immediate and acute training effects). Training load can be further broken to training intensity, training volume, training frequency, although that depends on the author and the time frame by which we analyze load. Training means are basically exercises which can be put on a continuum from general to specific based on couple of criteria of similarity with competition. Training methods can be numerous, although we can differ between continuous, interval, blah, blah. Here is where we determine hard days, easy days, hard weeks, deload weeks, loading schemes, like famous 3+1 scheme and different kind of progressions. In strength training, for example, we can utilize linear progression (where we increase the weight on the bar every training session with same reps and sets, like 3x5 w/80% to 3x5 w/82,5%), double progression (first increase number of reps done, then increase the weight), triple progression (famous ladders, or increasing the number of sets, then number of reps, then weight, or something like that I forgot). Of course this depends on the level of the lifter, phase, basically by everything defined by previous two levels of organization. In mixed-parallel approach, coaches often utilize high volume -low intensity programming and progress to high intensity-low volume. This is one of the ways of programming/progressing in mixed parallel approach. There can be numerous other ways of course. What is important here, is that with advanced athletes this form of progression/programming is one of the strategies that bring results, again depending on lot of other factors. What is wrong with this is that some western researchers, while analyzing programming of East Europe Olympic lifters in the Olympic lifts noted that they progressed from lower intensity-higher volume (something like using 10 sets of 2-3 reps with 60-80%) to lower volume-higher intensity (something like using 2-3 sets of 1-2 reps with 80-100%). This is the progression they used in the Programming Level, to improve their specific strength/strength speed (Planning Level) during certain part of the competition calendar (Periodization Level). What those western researchers were able to do is to utilize this programming/progression principle and somehow applying it to the Planning level, by recommending progression from high reps and low intensity (something like 4 sets of 12) to low reps and high intensity (something like 5 sets of 2). This is how Western periodization (or linear periodization) emerged on the scene. Again, what is wrong here is the fact that western researches applied progression principle from Programming level of a certain training components to Planning level as a general concept. So, now we had a strength endurance phase, hypertrophy phase, maximum strength phase, power phase, etc., in a sequential manner (aka Block). This kind of strength training planning is still used with beginners and with team sport athletes (Bompas scheme). After the emergent of this Western periodization, which was used as a method of planning of the strength development in general, numerous critiques started to be heard. Notably, the famous critique by Louie Simmons, who criticized sequential development of Western periodization, and proposed mixed-parallel system (ME, DE, RE) which he, erroneously termed conjugated periodization, now famous as Westside. The confusion was born and spread over the journals and later over the internet. Why you ask? Couple of reasons. First, mixed-parallel approach to strength development PLANNING was not new kind of periodization, but the traditional one, while sequential/block are younger in its development. Basically we have re-invention of the wheel here.

Second, term conjugate is similar term with conjugate-sequence system, a form of Block approach developed by late Yuri Verkhoshansky, so it is a misnomer. In a defense of the term conjugate there is the concept of conjugate exercise, again term coined by late Yuri Verkhoshansky, where he meant coupling technical movements and strength development, which basically means utilization of special exercises that mimic competition activity/technique with external loading. Westside powerlifters utilize and rotate a large amount of special exercises during the ME and DE days, which basically may justify the term conjugated, but still it created confusion. Please note that I am not trying to reduce the great importance of work by Louie Simmons, but rather trying to explain the big picture and fit the thing where they belong. It can be seen lately that Westside lifter started to utilize accumulation (high volume-low intensity general/specific exercises) and intensification (high intensity-low volume specific exercises) principles in their PROGRAMMING of maximum strength development (ME) and started to emphasize development of certain limiting factors one step at a time, which is basically concept from block/sequential approach to planning, and the things started to go in circle again and increased the confusion. Hopefully, with this article, the confusion is less and we now see the big picture. Seeing the big picture, seeing different categorical phases of organization of training process (athletic preparation system) and utilizing it in a pragmatic way is the aim of this article. So, instead of training to fit certain ideas (western periodization, undulating periodization, conjugate periodization) to your problem, use you pragmatic and critical thinking to solve the problem you have with smart periodization, planning and programming of training process. If you have lemon, make lemonade and enjoy in the process. Still, I have not answered the question what is periodization. Well, it should be obvious:it is a tool in your toolbox and only one part of the organizational processes. For further information on underlying principles of periodization, planning and programming, curious readers are directed to the following material:

Planning the strength training From novice to elite

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LIFTER According to Mark Rippetoe, the author of Practical Programming book, the lifters can be generally classified to four groups according to their level: novice, intermediate, advanced and elite. When planning strength training, one should take into account the level of the lifter, because there are distinct characteristic within each group. The planning of strength training for each group will be considered at the end of this article.

Taken from Rippetoe, Mark (2007). Practical Programming . Aasgaard Company

STRENGTH TRAINING GOALS Depending on the author, there can be numerous goals pursued with strength training. I tried to review them in my last article entitled Concurrent strategies in strength training. It can be said that reaching of the different strength training goals (and thus motor qualities) is based on utilization of different loading protocols (weight, reps, sets, tempo, rest, etc.) or methods. So, each of the methods aimed at reaching different strength training goal utilize different loading protocols. This is based on the repetition continuum, or the idea that different goals can be achieved utilizing different reps per set. There is a dynamic interaction between the variables of reps, sets and loads. The load used (% of 1RM) ultimately determines how many reps per set are done. Reps per set (or set time)

ultimately determines how many total sets must be done. The interaction between the three will affect what adaptation is seen. Although not all authorities agree, there is thought to be a continuum of adaptations which may occur with different repetition sets. This continuum is called repetition continuum. Without going into unnecessary theoretical discussion, I will use the following classification of strength training goals: 1. Maximal and Relative Strength The goal is the development of maximal strength The method used for developing this motor quality is Maximal Effort, or ME

2. Explosive Strength The goal is the development of explosive strength, or the ability to produce great force in least amount of time (RFD Rate of Force Development) The method used for developing this motor quality is Dynamic Effort, or DE Futher classification can include the development of explosive strength and reactive/elastic strength (plyometrics), althought this is not that important for this discussion 3. Muscular Hypertrophy The goal is the development of muscular hypertrophy, without going into the debate ofsarcoplasmatic vs. myofibrilar hypertrophy The method used for developing this motor quality is Submaximal Effort, or SE (mostly forfunctional or myofibrilar hypertrophy) and Repetition Effort, or RE (mostly for total orsarcoplasmatic hypertrophy). 4. Muscular Endurance The goal is the development of muscular endurance, fat loss, anatomic adaptation and sarcoplasmatic hypertrophy (depending on the context). Some also put vascularization, glycogen depletion, mitochondria development as the goal of this method The method used for developing this motor quality is Repetition Effort, or RE

WHAT THE HECK IS THE PERIODIZATION ANYWAY? Well, I guess there is no concise answer to this question. A lot of people define periodization differently, taking into account different parts of planning process. So, I am not so brave to give my own definition of what periodization really is. Anyway, when discussing periodization we must differ between, as I love to call them that way, Three Zoom Levels. First Zoom Level The planning of LTAD (long term athlete development), Olympic-year and annual training plan. This includes determination of preparatory phases, competition phases, transition phases and their structures depending on the competition schedule, age and level, along with the sport/position of the athlete. This also includes factors like whether/climatic, training facilities available, competition schedule, number of peaks and the duration of those peaks athletes must achieve, etc, etc. One may add the determination of

training components (goals) or motor abilities that needs to be addressed to achieve increase in performance Second Zoom Level Planning of the development of multiple training goals (motor abilities & skills) within each period defined by First Zoom Level. Here we can differ between traditional approach(concurrent or complexparallel), block and emphasis/pendulum approach IMHO. The choice is dependent on the First Zoom Level (which defines how much time do we have, conditions, etc), number of training goals that must be developed and when, and their compatibility, the level of the athlete, etc. Third Zoom Level Progression and programming of development of each training goal (motor-ability). Basically this determines how loading protocols should be organized and how much: means (general/specific/competition), methods, loads (intensity, frequency, volume, recovery, etc). This includes the approach that uses delayed training effect via acute over-reaching too. This should be based on the previous Zoom Levels, athletes level, his work capacity (ability to sustain training loading and recover from it), supplementation, injury toleration and the optimal loading for each training goal. It may sound funny that I have picked the term Zoom Level, but if you have ever used microscope or more possibly Google Earth, you know what I mean. The word Zoom can be easily substituted with the word Planning, and voila, the meaning is instantly evident. Basically, the numerous factors determine Periodization (whatever that may actually be anyway) used. There is no good or bad, just optimally picked based on those factors involved (context), goals and athletes. When dissecting and analysing training systems and discussing periodization and planning we must use differ between Zoom Levels. Different authors stick to one Zoom Level without considering other levels of the zoom. When the the periodization is mentioned, most of the authors talk about preparatory, competition and transition periods (First Zoom Level). Some of them talk about load progression, like 3+1 (3 weeks loading, 1 week unloading), waves and undulations and stuff (Third Zoom Level). You have to go from whole to parts (Zoom Level) and from back to start (goal oriented, time oriented, what you want to achieve and when, and then plan it backward) to discuss periodization and to actually plan your training system. Recently there was a great deal of discussion and confusion when it comes to Second Zoom Level. With most of the sports there are numerous training goals (motor abilities) that need to be achieved/developed in order to improve performance. Some of those goals are compatible and some are not, some lean on each other (related and dependent on each other) and some of them dont. The question that arises is how to approach the development of those multiple goals in predefined time and context defined by First Zoom Level? IMHO there are two distinct approaches: parallel and serial development. Parallel approach develops all defined motor abilities at the same time. Depending on the definition of the same time this approach may have different variations. For example, all defined motor abilities may be developed in one training session, one training day, couple of training days and one training microcycle (usually a week).

Serial approach develops motor abilities one-after-another in sequential/consecutive fascion. Depending on the order of the development numerous variations can be indentified.

This is the first error that I see people do when discussing the Second Zoom Level. What people are forgetting is that there is a continuum between these two extremes, and, more importantly - the parallel and serial approaches are vague terms (!!) that depends on classification of the motor abilities and training goals that must be developed in the first place.

Traditional training approach utilize Parallel development, hence the term concurrent and complex-parallel. And now comes the confusion! There is a lot of information out there that states that traditional approach is actually sequential (serial). Sequential models originated post complex-parallel, and to address some of the shortcomings of this system with respect to elite athletes. Anyone who try to portray concurrent methodologies as something new, all the rage, the funeral of sequential models, is, in fact, wrong. Traditional training approach is/was actually a concurrent approach, where all the abilities were developed simultaneously. With elite athletes, problems with traditional training approach started to emerge. In order to continue to improve at a given motor ability, elites would need more and more volume of training and since all abilities are developed simultaneously, excessive (total) volume was needed. This was time where doping was necessary evil to sustain tremendous training volume, along with becoming a full-time athlete, training couple of times per day. There is a trend in volume reduction after the AAS ban and prohibition. Complex-parallel approach as any other has it pros and cons that should be tak en into account when chosing your approach. Depending on the level of the athlete, sport, time available and other

factors, complex-parallel approach may be the best solution there is. Some important factors must be taken into account when using this approach, like optimization of training time and motor abilities, design of the microcycle depending on the compatibility of motor abilities, wave-like loading, etc. Anyway, this approach is one of the best solution when working with kids and low level athletes and with some more advanced athletes that dont have much time to develop motor abilities (take for an example professional soccer player who have 1-2 months of preparatory period). As a side note, complex-parallel training systems in non-strength sports is very different than complex-parallel (concurrent) strength training in powerlifting, weightlifting and strongman training. First of all, in strength sports the barbell is the sport, its the iron game and the purpose of the training is to improve the lifts by improving various motor abilities that determine successful performance, like technique, absolute and relative strength, speed, mass, sticking point, lock-out, grip, gear work, etc, while in non-strength sports, strength training have a purpose of injury-prevention, increase on-field performance, etc. In non-strength sports this is far more simpler, with much less details. This is why most, if not all, athletes from non-strength sports never reach advanced level of strength training. They usually need novice and intermediate planning with couple examples of more advanced planning of strength training. They need to juggle with more motor abilities besides strength. This is why their Second Zoom Level is more zoomed out when it comes to strength training compared with strength sport athletes which need more detailed zoom level. Block approach was designed with advanced athletes on mind, who cannot develop everything at once. They need to prioritize the training goals or they will suffer from overtraining and limited progress. So, during Block training one or more compatible motor abilities are developed, and after some time the training switches to another set of abilities. One training block is a time period of unidirectional and concentrated loading aimed at developing one or more compatible motor abilities. With this approach, total training stress is less when compared to complex-parallel approach, but individual stress (aimed at one or more motor abilities) is greater, hence the term concentrated loading. Block training utilize the following training principles:

Delayed transformation This principle entails the transformation of the training load into improved performance. Peak performance will not normally occur during periods of heavy training due to the accumulation of training fatigue and the time that adaptation to training loads require. Thus a period of easier load is needed to demonstrate the results of previous training. This is a basis for taper and pre-competition blocks. Delayed transmutation This principle states that in order to realize performance improvements, specific exercises and loads must be utilized to transmutate (transform) and maximize the fitness acquired during previous training stages. For example, after you increased relative strength via strength block, you need to spend some time sprinting or jumping to transmutate relative strength to speed or jump ability. This is a basis of conjugations of the blocks, so that training effects of the preceding blocks is maximally utilized during the second one, achieving more than just the mathematical summ. Also, this is where special exercises comes in, to transmutate more general training effects. Training residuals

 When training is designed in traditional manner and many abilities are developed simultaneously, the risk of detraining is negligible because each quality receives some proportion of training stimuli. However, if these abilities are developed consecutively, as proposed in block approach, the problem of detraining becomes very important. If you develop one ability and lose another one at the same time, you have to take into account the duration of the effect of the given training after its cessation and how fast you will lose the obtained ability level when you stop training it. In other words, you have to know residuals effects of each type of training. The rate of loss of training effects and respective training residuals vary widely for different motor abilities Superposition of training effects Development of one motor ability can have a positive or negative effect on other motor abilities. Blocks needs to be sequenced optimally to ensure that training in subsequent blocks enhances the work carried out in previous mesocycles. Along with delayed transmutation principles, superimposition of training effects is a basis of conjugations of the blocks, achieving greater training effect than just the mathematical sum Basically, Block training is not just random sequencing of motor ability development. It needs to be well though based on delayed training effects and training residuals, so that the best performance is achieved at the most important time. There are couple of Block systems out there like Bondarchuk system, Verkhoshansky system (CSS Conjugate Sequence System) and Issurin system (BPC Block Periodization Concept ), with their own implementation of mentioned ideas.

Issurin Block Periodization concept

Issurin Block Periodization concept

Verkhoshansky Conjugate Sequence System I guess the main differences between Verkhoshansky ans Issurin models are that Verkhoshansky puts strong emphasis on strength and special strength block and purposefully induce delayed training effects (via over-reaching), while Issurin does not do that (at least it doesnt go into much detail on this very topic in his book), but I could be wrong. I would love to discuss this models in further detail, but I guess they are a topics of another article(s). This leads me to one interesting topic maintenance. Maintenance principle states that when you stop developing one ability, that ability start to decline (Use it or lose it! law), along with the fact that loads (retention loads) aimed at maintaining one ability are far less than loads necessary to develop one ability. In Block training there is no maintenance training for non-targeted motor abilities. If you look at Verkhoshansky model, during strength block, maximal strength actually falls down and later it raises again and surpass initial values (delayed effect). So, doing strength maintenance work during subsequent blocks may increase the time needed for strength to jump up, and screw the whole point of conjugations. This is why knowledge of residual training effects is of extreme importance in devising block training system. On another look, what are you going to maintain anyway? Decreased strength potential after strength block? In his book Issurin mentioned inclusion of mini-blocks (lasting 2-4 days) aimed at maintaining previously developed abilities. I guess the problem of maintenance loads on non-targeted abilities is highly specific to a given variation of the system, especially whether there is usage of delayed training effects, which IMHO dont need maintenance work, at least not in negative phase (over -reaching phase) of the curve. For example, after 4 weeks of strength block that caused acute over-reaching and depression of maximum strength, you dont need maintenance loads for about more 4 weeks, as it usually takes for the delayed training effects to take place (same as loading time). After that, you may utilize

maintenance loads to maintain new reached strength levels, but that depends on the structure of block training.

Issurin Block Periodization concept Mini Blocks concept One of the problems with Block periodization are injury issues. Remember when you tried new routine last time? Yeah, you got sore and stiff. I also know from experience that when more advanced team athlete starts to seriously strength train, he will feel stiff for a week or even two. This happens when there are clear and sudden transitions of training components. For example, when you switch from strength block to plyometrics block it could be pretty risky, and expect long lasting stiffness. Stiff muscles and stiff nodes and knots can make you strain your muscle more easily. To avoid this issue of adaptation stiffness (Charlie Francis term), one high intensity training component could be performed at very low volume, so it would not interfere with other training components. Utilizing this approach will avoid adaptation stiffness when the component is reintroduced on a larger scale. Yet, again this brings us to maintenance principle and maintenance loads. Before I introduce Emphasis/Pendulum approach, I must remind you that these two examples (traditional & block) are extremes and there is a continuum in between them. So, every Block system must utilize concentrated/unidirectional loading, delayed and residual training effects, but not every system that utilize those principles is Block. Same for the traditional (complex-parallel) approach. Traditional approach must utilize parallel (simultaneous) development of multiple abilities at the same time, yet not every system that utilize parallel (simultaneous) development is traditional. There is a lot of space in the continuum between for various solutions, and one of the is Emphasis/Pendulum approach, which IMO utilize good stuff from both extremes. Emphasis/Pendulum training approach is basically something in the middle between two extremes: serial and parallel approach and complex-parallel and block approach. I dont know whether this approach is named Emphasis/Pendulum in scientific circles, but I got this idea from one great discussion at Charlie Francis forum. As Charlie use to say Everything is done, only the volume varies or in other words all training components are being performed simultaneously, at all times and only the volumes vary, from week to week, from mesocycle to mesocycle. Charlie Francis calls this Vertical Integration. More about his system can be found in recent e-book entitled Key Concepts Elite Edition. Basically, the premise of Emphasis approach is the fact that advanced athletes cannot improve everything at once, so they need more unidirectional loading (emphasis) with concentrated loading aimed at improving one or more compatible motor abilities. This is same as Block approach. On a side note,

Emphasis approach utilize maintenance principle and complex-parallel development of non-targeted motor abilities. This approach is thus great solution for advanced athletes to further improve their abilities with the minimal risk of injury and detraining. This is accomplished with unidirectional loading and maintenance loads. The following picture is taken from Zatsiorsky bookScience and practice of strength training , where conventional planning is actually serial approach, and New planning is Emphasis approach.

Taken from Zatsiorsky, Vladimir (1995). Science and practice of strength training . Human Kinetics Emphasis and maintenance loads can be manipulated by training intensity, volume, frequency, etc, depending on the training system, sport, etc. These are in short, IMHO, different approaches to deal with Second Zoom (planning) Level. I havent touched the First Zoom Level that much for the reason that this level is one of the most documented. The next thing we are going to deal with is some stuff from Third Level of Zoom, called load.

LOAD AND LOAD CLASSIFICATION Load is a part of training triangle means, methods and loads, that represent input to any training system (training tool), or training stimuli/stress that influences athletes state, triggering adaptation processes which eventually leads to different training effects (immediate, delayed, cumulative, residual, etc). Defining load is also hard thing to do. It describes quantity and quality of training stress/stimuli caused by training means and methods. We may also look at the load under different time frames, like exercise load, training load, daily load, weekly load etc. Depending on the author, there are different components of the load. For the sole purpose of this article I will define the following load components: 1. Intensity 2. Volume

3. Duration and quality of rest period Some authors also define training frequency as another load component, but this depends on the time frame under which we actually analyse training loads. We will deal with training frequency later, and for now we will stick to intensity and volume, since they are one of the most important components of the training load. Another component may be a difficulty of the exercise too. Intensity in strength world is a weight on a barbell, or percentage of individual 1RM. It can be presented in absolute terms (weight), or in relative (percentage of 1RM or in nRM values). In another sports, intensity usually represent quality of work done, like velocity, height, pace, power, etc. Volume represents amount or quantity of the work (load) done. In strength world volume is measured with number of sets, number of lifts, tonnage etc. Volume can be represented in absolute terms (tonnage) or relative (normalized volume), and it can be also represented per intensity brackets (like volume in 80%-90% zone, etc). There is also a term intensiveness or effort, which usually causes confusion in strength world. Recently, Lyle McDonald has put one great article on this very subject entitled 'What is training intensity'. To cut a long story short, effort is a feeling of how hard something feels to you at the time. For example, compare lifting 100kg for 6 reps and lifting it for 8 reps. Intensity is same (100kg), but the effort is not. Effort is usually represented with RPE scale and can be also represented with proximity to failure. So lifting 3RM weight for 3 reps and lifting 10RM for 10 reps is equally hard, thus both have same effort or RPE value (although of different quality, due different system stress CNS vs. muscular/metabolic), but very different intensity. Sense of effort, how scientists calls it, is basically a perception of load and its immediate effects on the body (its reaction), homeostasis perturbations and the work done by the body to maintain that homeostasis within normal limits. Thus, perception of effort is not only affected with intensity of the load but its volume too, and also with emotional state of the athlete, psychological stimulants, music, character etc. More interested geeks could read myHomoeostasis Performance Model to find more about it. Mike Tuchscherer created very interesting training system that utilize RPE scale. More about this great powerlifting system can be found in his book The Reactive Training Manual. RPE stands for Rate of Perceived effort. Basically, every set has RPE value, based on the sense how hard it was, what speed the bar had and how close to failure you were. Mike uses the following RPE scale: 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 <4 Maximal. No reps left in tank. Doesnt means going to failure thought Last rep is tough, but still 1 rep left in the tank Weight is too heavy to maintain fast bar speed, but is not struggle. 2-4 reps left in tank Weight moves quickly when maximal force is applied to the weight. Speed work Light speed work. Moves quickly with moderate force Most warm-up weights Recovery. Usually 20+ rep set. Not hard but intended to flush the muscle Not that important Modified from Tuchscherer, Michael (2008). The Reactive training manual. The easiest way to gauge RPE scale of a set, Mike states, is to ask yourself how many more reps you couldve done with particular weight. Honesty is the absolute key here!

RPE system is far more accurate than any percentage system for many reasons, including the training history, ammount of fast-slow fibers, duration of the cycle, good and bad days, sleep, nutrition and supplementation. RPE system allows individualization, and after coaches and athletes understand it, it becomes very powerfull tool to individualize the training. Anyway, there is a rough correlation between RPE scale and percentage of a given rep range. Mike have developed one chart as a starting point, to approximate RPE scale with a given percentage. RPE 10 9 8 7 12 reps 62 60 58 56 10 reps 66 64 62 60 8 reps 71 68 66 64 7 reps 74 71 68 66 6 reps 77 74 71 68 5 reps 80 77 74 71 4 reps 85 80 77 74 3 reps 90 85 80 77 2 reps 95 90 85 80 1 rep 100 95 90 85

Modified from Tuchscherer, Michael (2008). The Reactive training manual. Mike uses RPE scale to auto-regulate training, using stuff like fatigue stops, optimal training volume, fatigue percents etc. We will talk about auto-regulatory training in a moment. For practical purposes, it is neccessary to define three general functions of a load/workout:development, retention and restoration. Workout type Load level Extreme Large Substantial Medium Small Approximate restoration time > 72h 48 - 72h 24 - 48h 12 - 24h <12h Workout RPE assesment, 10 9 8 7 <6

Development Retention Restoration

Modified from Issurin, Vladimir (2008). Block Periodization . Ultimate Athlete Concepts It is also interesting to depict the relation of load level and possibility of setbacks(injuries, stiffness, soreness, additional recovery time, etc), that impedes with training consistency.

Modified from Daniels, Jack (2005). Daniels' Running Formula . Human Kinetics It can be seen clearly from the picture above, that there is a (sliding) window of optimal loading, under which there is optimal relation of training effects and possibility of setbacks. You get the biggest bang for your buck, and with minimal possibility of a setback. Using larger load level, will cause less and less training effect, but greater possibility of setback. I am not trying to say that this impact/shock loading is an absolute no-no, but rather it should be used sparingly and wisely, usually with most advanced athletes. One of the most important problems of the training are (1) how to find this optimal loading window, (2) when to stop loading, and (3) what to do after exceeding optimal loading, both in one training session and in longer training phases. Finding this optimal loading window includes things like talking to the athlete, asking the right questions at the right time, observing his performance (qualitatively), measuring performance (quantitatively), etc. This is why training is more an art than it is a science. Anyway, my current thought regarding this problem is, that along with logging training loads and observing effects (external performance and internal state changes, like mood, HR, bLA, etc) and making cause-and-effect relations, more important aspect is hand-off training approach. Hands-off training approach is based on guided-discovery idea, where you put an athlete into a situation demanding decision-making and guide him to find his own solution. Guided-discovery idea is currently a hot topic in motor learning theory and learning of sport games, but I guess it can be used with strength athletes too. This way athletes are not only an object of training process but actually a noun and verb too. Coaches are usually afraid to give freedom of choice to their athletes, and usually ut ilize authoritative training style and suffer from a need to control everything. I guess they miss a lot with this approach and may get ulcer too. The goal of training is to create more intelligent athletes, that are able to train themselves using their own knowledge and sense. Utilizing auto-regulative training and using RPE scales (and learning your athletes how to use them), may be a major pain in the arse in short term, but in long term it may be very productive solution. I know there are dumb and lazy athletes that only wants to train, lift or compete, but creating (or helping athletes to create themselves) a real champ imply teaching him how to listen to his

body, principles of training and recovery. They need to be more involved in training process and decision making process. They must understand that it is about them anyway. One solution to this problems are using RPE scale and auto-regulatory training, that we are going to deal with later in this article.

VOLUME-INTENSITY TRADE-OFF MYTH As we have outlined, volume and intensity are un-splittable and principal parts of the load. There is one myth that exists and its called volume-intensity trade off. Yes, there is a trade-off, but it depends on time-frame under which you analyze the load. Under most shortest time-frame, there is trade-off between volume and intensity: the more weight on the bar, the less reps you could do with it. Yet again, you can do 8 reps with 10RM and you can do 9 reps with the same load, so this volume-intensity trade off exists only on weight-repetition maximum (RM) relation, and there is no reason to use it on larger timeframe scales of loading (exercise load, workout load, microcycle load, etc). You could also do 3 sets of 3 reps with 3RM, or you could do 1 or 5 sets (depending on the work capacity, level and the purpose of workout) either. Managing volume and intensity is very important aspect of training and loading, especially with intermediate and advanced athletes and falling under to volume-intensity trade-off dogma limits you for numerous solutions. Intensity and volume are NOT reversely related. All volume/intensity combos serve their purpose in training and here are couple of examples. Volume Medium High Low Low High Intensity Medium High Low High Low Purpose Bread and butter of training Push one into mild overtraining (overreaching) and lead to greater gains once followed by a taper Active recovery / deload Sets PRs Build foundation for stable gains

Modified from Tsatsouline, Pavel (2005). Beyond Bodybuilding. Dragon Door Publications. It is true that one of the characteristic of advanced lifters is that their training must be organized into longer periods of time, and those periods progress from higher volume and lower intensity toward lower volume and higher intensity. That is basically a trade-off if you look at it that way, but there are also other solutions to train advanced athletes. It is important to unlock volume and intensity. It is interesting to note that linear periodization or Western periodization is actually a misunderstand Third Zoom Level (load progression) of advanced Olympic lifters. Those guys spend some time at emphasizing volume of training and technique at doing great number of sets at lower-medium percentage of their PBs in clean/jerk and snatch (i.e. 8-10 sets of 2-3 reps at 70-80% or something like that) and then transitioning to intensity phase utilizing smaller number of sets with greater intensity (i.e. 4-6sets of 1-2 reps with 80-90%). This way they approach planning the load for development of strengthspeed necessary of Olympic lifts (linear periodization). How do they integrated development of strengthspeed with other components like relative strength, muscle mass and reactive strength is a matter of Second Zoom Level.

But some wise guy(s) from Western hemisphere used this linear progression of the load (where lifters utilized great number of sets with 1-3 reps at lower intensity) that was used to develop strengthspeed for Olympic lifts and applied it to Second Zoom Level by utilizing 10-15 reps per set in volume phases and 1-3 reps per set in intensity phases and named it Western periodization (or others did this for them). This way they passed through whole repetition continuum and stressed most of strength qualities in serial manner. And then confusion started with the idea that you must spend some time with 10-12 reps to improve your 1RM. Thats OK with the novices, kids etc, but this was actually suggested to advanced lifters. Yes, there is time and place for this too, but the issue I am trying to emphasize here is that you cannot analyze one system using only one Zoom Level, you must understand all three of them. And after those wise Western guy(s) defined western periodization (which was actually misunderstood load progression of Olympic lifters linear periodization), Westside guys (WSBB) critiqued its serial development of abilities and devised conjugate training (actually complex-parallel approach), as something new (which is certainly not, since complex-parallel approach is the traditional/first one). Lately, Westside guys also utilized Accumulation/Intensification phases (or Volume-Intensity phases) in their load progressions for a given strength ability (usually maximum strength and ME method) and also started to emphasize given quality over a certain period of time and then the things started to go in circle again. People were/are confused. They dont know what linear periodization means, what is traditional, what is concurrent, what is western, what is block, what is conjugated. I am not saying I know, but things start to finally open. This is because they dont see the big picture and dont have Thr ee Zoom Levels. It all started with the fact that advanced athletes need more volume-intensity alternations (volume phase, intensity phase) as a method of load progression (Third Zoom Level) to further develop certain motor ability. Then some wise guy(s) applied this principle to whole repetition continuum which affected Second Zoom Level and appeared that all motor abilities are developed sequentially/serially. And this is the root of this problem. So, the solution is to look at the problem from Three Zoom Levels. There is (1) planning of the season, there is the (2) approach to develop multiple motor abilities (complex-parallel, block, emphasis) depending on the level of the athletes and there is (3) planning of the loading for a given abilities again depending on the development, organization and level of the athlete. Do not mix those three levels of planning and there will be no confusion.

TRAINING FREQUENCY AND WORK CAPACITY Managing training intensity, volume and frequency are key for optimal loading and training adaptation, avoidance of setback and overtraining. Training frequency is a term that is also hard to define like intensity and volume. Some authors consider training frequency as number of training session in a microcycle, some of them define it as number of training sessions per muscle group per microcycle, or as number of training sessions per training goal. Basically, you need to take into consideration both definitions, since you need to take into account muscle loading, central nervous system loading, endocrine system loading and the joints loading (maybe some more, but cant remember now)

Training frequency depends on a lot of factors, like training goal, training phase, level of the athlete and work capacity. Numerous training systems are different variations of intensity, volume and frequency combos. Work capacity is also hard to define and usually it is context-dependent and has also a huge number of subtypes. Basically, work capacity is the ability to sustain training load and recover from it efficiently. You cannot develop work capacity by doing bunch of sled work and intervals. This will develop a form of aerobic power that could be used to speed up recovery between sets, but this also depends on sets type (what repetition continuum zone). Work capacity is usually something that must be looked at larger time-frame (like microcycle), and it is something that develops over the years. Basically, you can manage to survive a given training session, but you may not actually recover from it in matter of days even weeks due poor work capacity. Factors that affect training frequency also affect work capacity, like muscle loading and ability to recover from it, central nervous system loading and toleration for such a work, endocrine system loading and ability to recover from it and joint loading and ability to sustain it. Thus, the optimal training frequency depends on the goals of training, intensity and volume of training and fatigue type they develop (muscular, CNS, endocrine, joint...), level of the athlete and work capacity.

Type of loading/fatigue Muscle loading/fatigue Local effect

Description Volume of eccentric loading and work done. Proximity of failure (greater eccentric stress). Note that micro-trauma and total protein break-down in a workout can affect CNS via inflammatory cytokines. Volume of compound movements (great muscle mass and total MU recruitment), volume of work in >90% 1RM, proximity of failure (intensiveness, RPE of sets, psychological effort), speed of contraction, amount of micro-trauma and total protein break-down (volume of eccentric contractions) via inflammatory cytokines Total volume of training

CNS loading/fatigue Central effect

Endocrine loading/fatigue Central effect Joints loading/fatigue Local effect

Total volume of training above certain threshold. Note that microtrauma in a workout can affect CNS via inflammatory cytokines

One thing that I realized when working with soccer players (not directly related to strength training, but it is highly related to this work capacity issue), is that it is very easy to prepare them for one match. Most of them can play on freshness as they use to call it. But, after that match, they will need more recovery days, and this will limit them in the long run due lowered technical and tactical skill work. Having poor work capacity will cause training and competition inconsistency, or performance swings, usually with periods of setback and injuries in between. Thus, one of the goals is to prepare them not just for one match, but for the whole week loading and number of serial matches. Improved work capacity will improve training and performance consistency and allow them to have longer peak or play whole very long season with great performance and not swinging from match to match. Athletes with great work capacity (again, not just aerobic power but ability to sustain long term loading and recover from it) are

always on the scene, and guys will lower work capacity will be at peak every now and then, and most of the time injured. So, I guess the key to performance consistency and sport success is high work capacity. There is also an upper-end of work capacity which is actually a whole point behind block and emphasis approach of training. As you become advanced, you just simply cannot pound on everything at once and manage to recover from it, without setbacks, limited progress and overtraining. You focus your efforts on couple of things, make them move again and then switch. Rinse and repeat. That is the whole point behind block and emphasis approach and main limitation of traditional complex-parallel approach. But dont think that improving work capacity is not possible. Let me cite Mike Tuchscherer f rom his The Reactive Training Manual, page 47: It is important to note that if you dont elevate your wor k capacity, then you are setting up for early stagnation due to an inability to accomplish and recover from work. Basically, as you become more advanced and it takes more work to make gains, you wont be able to do more work because if you do, you will overtrain. This isnt something few weeks of sled dragging is going to fix. Work capacity is developed over the years of training, which is why it is vitally important not to forget about it in your current stage of training. This brings me to the fact that some athletes are not that advanced that they need more advanced planning, they just suck at their work capacity, and maybe one solution to the problem is to develop their work capacity before going to more advanced stages, where the lack of it may limit their real potential. One approach to this problem is to play with intensity, volume and frequency combos. Mike Tuchscherer suggests using two different combos from time to time in every training phase Combo Name Fatigue-Based Purpose To teach your body how to recover from large amount of fatigue Frequency-Based To teach your body to recovery from smaller bouts of fatigue more quickly Modified from Tuchscherer, Michael (2008). The Reactive training manual. Please note that the term fatigue refers to total stress (load) induced by a workout. It is not simply volume and not simply intensity, its their interaction. By rotating both into your training, your work capacity goes up, therefore your ability to accomplish and recover from training goes up too. Emphasizing one combo and then rotating may be done on every level of training and with any goal too. To conclude: to improve training adaptation, avoid setback and overtraining via improvements in work capacity, it is necessary to manage intensity, volume and frequency combos of the training load. Case closed! MICROCYCLES AND THEIR CLASSIFICATION The frequency is higher, but the fatigue induced by each session is lower Organization The frequency is lower, but the fatigue induced by each session is high.

Microcycle is the shortest training cycle. It encompasses a number of workouts and lasts a number of days, most often one week. There are six types of training microcycles, characterized by specific purpose, load levels, particulars of workload design and duration. There is a differentiation between microcycles in three principle ways: loading, competing and recovery. Microcyle type Type Adjustment Loading LOADING Impact Fitness development by extreme training stimuli Immediate preparation for competition Participation in competition Active recovery Purpose Initial adaptation to workloads Fitness development Load level Medium Substantial high Very high extreme Medium High very high Low Particulars Gradual increase in workload The use of big and substantial workloads Use and summation of extreme workloads Tuning for forthcoming competition, using event-specific means Sport and eventspecific performance Use of wide spectrum of restorative means

Precompetitive COMPETING Competitive RECOVERY Restoration

Modified from Issurin, Vladimir (2008). Block Periodization . Ultimate Athlete Concepts Load level within each microcycle depends on the frequency, volume and intensity of individual training sessions. Different combos of mentioned variables can be utilized to create different load level. This is very important in planning the training. The design and structure of the mesocycle, medium size training cycle that contains number of microcycle, depends on the Second Zoom Level (complex-parallel, block, emphasis) approach chosen, training goals and type of mesocycle, optimal loading and athletes work capacity (Third Zoom Level) and First Zoom Level (competition calendar) or time of competition and mesocycle position in larger training cycles (preparatory, competition, transition). A lot of factors to consider. Here are couple of generic examples: Adjustment Loading Loading Restoration Adjustment Adjustment Loading Loading Loading Restoration Adjustment Loading Impact Impact Restoration Restoration Adjustment Loading Impact Restoration Impact Restoration Adjustment Loading Impact Restoration Pre-comp Competitive Adjustment Loading Loading Loading Pre-comp Competitive

More about possible mesocycle design and types will be said later in this article, when we are going to talk about different levels of the lifter

AUTO-REGULATORY TRAINING Auto-regulatory training is about finding optimal amount of loading to achieve desired training effects using your own perception or feel, along with some measurable and visible signs. The whole point is to make training individual, based on current state of the athlete and his work capacity.

There can be numerous application of auto-regulatory training in practice. Some may add that auto-regulatory training also includes measurement equipment, like force-plates, tendo units along with coaches qualitative evaluation, but IMO this is regulated training, not auto-regulated, where athlete himself have to regulate the training load based on his feel or perception. Usually the training volume is the variable that is regulated with auto-regulatory training, since the training intensity is a measure of training quality and training effect seen. Thus, managing training volume you manage training stress or loading. The whole principle behind auto-regulatory training is acritical drop-off concept. A critical drop-off concept states that when intensity (in regulate training with measuring equipment and coach) or effort (an athletes sense or perception of work hardness) exits from pre-defined boundaries, the training (set, exercise, workout) should be stopped. Or in other words, when the quality (intensity) of work falls down below certain threshold, the training is stopped. Mike Tuchscherer implemented this auto-regulatory principle (critical drop-off) in his Reactive Traning using RPE values and Fatigue Stops. Fatigue Stops is a method of controlling training volume (number of sets done) and thus controlling training load or stress. Mike goes even futher to advise not to pre-plan the number of sets. You should let your body be your guide, and if you should do more or less, your body will let you know. So, you basically do your sets, and when your strength level go down, or your RPE value goes up, you stop. This way, you hit optimal training volume/load. So, instead doing 5x5 with 80%, you can do sets of 5 @ 8-9 RPE value until you hit Fatigue Stop. Sometimes it is going to be 2 sets, sometimes it is going to be 6, depending on you level, work capacity, training day (good or bad, quality of sleep, nutrition and supplementation, spending nights drinking/partying etc). Yet again, depending on the goal of the training, you want to over-stress yourself in order to super-compensate later (for example in impact microcycles with extreme loads). As I have stated earlier, critical-drop off point is quality-meter, when the training is stopped after the quality falls bellow certain threshold. So, if we move the threshold, we will affect fatigue stops and thus training volume. Since the quality in strength training is weight on the bar, allowing weight to fall for a given value until some threshold, we will affect training volume with auto-regulation, because we would be able to do more work although with reduced quality. Mike uses Fatigue Percents to manage training volume with auto-regulatory training by defining quality threshold via percent drop-off. Mike also uses time limits (amount of time available for exercise) to manage training volume. So, mentioned sets of 5 @ 8-9 RPE can be managed to induce given load/stress level by allowing weight on the bar to fall for a given percentage. Mike uses the following percentages: Very High Stress High Stress Medium stress Low Stress Deload stress 10% drop-off 7% drop-off 5% drop-off 3% drop-off 0% drop-off

Modified from Tuchscherer, Michael (2008). The Reactive training manual. For example, if we do squats for 5 reps @ 8-9 RPE with 150kg, and we want to induce medium volume-stress, we could (a) instantly reduce weight for 5% to 142.5kg and keep doing set until our RPE is no longer 8-9, or (b) progressively reduce weight from set to set to be @ 8-9 RPE value until 5% drop-

off is reached. Certainly, different average intensity and total volume will result from these two approaches, so a lifter can use one or another approach in different phases (for example intensity phase or volume phase mesocycle). Sometimes, the number of reps will fall (for a given RPE ) before you can manage weight on the bar to reach certain drop-off. To quantify drop-off from rep decrease, Mike suggests the following values: Initial number of reps 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 reps less 5% 5% 4% 4% 3% 3% 3% 2.5% 2.5% 2% 2% 2% 2 reps less 10% 8% 8% 6% 6% 6% 5% 5% 4% 4% 4% 3 reps less

12% 12% 9% 9% 9% 7.5% 7.5% 6% 6% 6%

Modified from Tuchscherer, Michael (2008). The Reactive training manual. Taking our sets of 5 @ 8-9 RPE as an example again, to reach 5% drop-off and induce medium stress, we could continue doing sets until we can manage to do 3 reps with same weight @ 8-9 RPE. This will also affect total volume and average intensity compared to previous two example. Here is the hypothetical example for sets of 5 @ 8-9 RP with 150kg starting weight, using these three mentioned approaches to drop-off calculation for Medium Stress (5% drop-off) Progressive weight decrease approach 1. set: 5 reps X 150kg @8 RPE 2. set: 5 reps X 150kg @9 RPE 3. set: 5 reps X 147.5kg @9 RPE 4. set: 5 reps X 145kg @9 RPE 5. set: 5 reps X 142.5 kg @8 RPE 6. set: 5 reps X 142.5 kg@9 RPE 7. set not done Instant weight decrease approach 1. set: 5 reps X 150kg @8 RPE 2. set: 5 reps X 142.5kg @7 RPE 3. set: 5 reps X 142.5kg @7 RPE 4. set: 5 reps X 142.5kg @7 RPE 5. set: 5 reps X 142.5kg @8 RPE 6. set: 5 reps X 142.5kg @8 RPE 7. set: 5 reps X 142.5kg @8 RPE 8. set: 5 reps X 142.5kg @9 RPE 9. set not done *Number of lifts: 40 (0%) *Tonnage: 5737.5kg (0%) Average weight: 143.43kg (4.38%) Average RPE: 7.75 (-9.8%) Less-reps approach 1. set: 5 reps X 150kg @8 RPE 2. set: 5 reps X 150kg @9 RPE 3. set: 4 reps X 150kg @8 RPE 4. set: 4 reps X 150 kg @8 RPE 5. set: 4 reps X 150kg @9 RPE 6. set: 3 reps X 150kg @9 RPE 7. set not done

Number of lifts: 30 (-25%) Tonnage: 4387.5kg (-23%) Average weight: 146.25kg (2.5%) *Average RPE: 8.6 (0%)

Number of lifts: 25 (-37%) Tonnage: 3750 (-34%) *Average weight: 150kg (0%) Average RPE: 8.5 (-1.16%)

Something tells me that less-reps approach is more appropriate with sets of higher reps (RE work) for example 5 and higher, and weight decrease approach is more appropriate for sets with lower reps (ME work). Also, from the table above we can see that different approaches to auto-regulatory training yield different tonnage (volume), average intensity and average effort (RPE). For example, lessreps approach can be used in phases where intensity is dominant, instant weight decrease approach can be

used in phases where volume is dominant, and progressive weight decrease can be used in phases where intensiveness (effort) is dominant. I must admit that this kind of drop-off calculation is hard even with straight sets, but extremely hard with stage and wave sets (see Concurrent strategies in strength training). To make things even complicated, your RPE can change from set to set. You could also calculate average RPE for exercise if you dont want to stick to a given RPE bracket (to call it that way). You need to be extremely experienced with this system to use it properly, thus this kind of load auto-regulation is reserved for advanced and experienced lifters.

VOLUME AND INTENSITY PHASES As we have pointed out, volume and intensity of training are two principal components of training load. They are also NOT reversely related. So, one can obtain similar levels of loading by emphasizing one over the another. I have also mentioned that training of advanced lifters must be organized into longer periods of time, and those periods progress from higher volume and lower intensity toward lower volume and higher intensity (more on this later). You can arrange this using more subtle progression (linear periodization), or switching from Volume Phase (or Accumulation) to Intensity Phase (or Intensification) more abruptly. Those phases are mesocycles or blocks. Volume and Intensity phases are two ways to get you stronger, yet they develop strength in slightly different way at the motor-unit level. Sometimes Volume phase is used to elicit delayed training effect via acute over-reaching (but in this case the both volume and intensity must be higher), and Intensity phase is designed to utilize those delayed training effect (but in this case volume must be lower and intensity higher). Along with defining Volume and Intensity phases, one may use Fatigue and Frequency based cycles that constitute one or more Volume/Intensity phases.

Ordinary Cycle Volume Intensity

Fatigue Based Cycle Volume Intensity

Frequency Based Cycle Volume Intensity

Please do NOT equate Volume phase with hypertrophy phase and Intensity phase with maximal strength phase! Volume and Intensity phases are a way of load progression/planning (Third Zoom Level) and Hypertrophy and Maximal Strength phases are a way of organizing training goals (Second Zoom Level) and in this case serial manner. Volume and intensity phases can be utilized for the development of all motor abilities (see the following table for hypothetical examples)

Maximal strength (ME)

Volume phase Pre-set 6 sets X 2 reps @ 8-9 RPE

Intensity phase Pre-set 3 sets X 2 reps @ 9-10 RPE

Auto-regulatory Sets of 2 reps @ 8-9 RPE w/ Fatigue percents (Instant weight decrease approach) Strength-Speed (Olys) Pre-set 8-10 sets X 2-3 reps @ 6-7 RPE Auto-regulatory Sets of 2-3 reps @ 6-7 RPE w/ Fatigue percents (progressive weight decrease approach) or use tendo unit Hypetrophy Pre-set 4-6 sets X 10-12 reps @ 8-9 RPE Auto-regulatory Sets of 10-12 reps @ 8-9 RPE w/ Fatigue percents (instant weight decrease approach) Pre-set 4-6 sets X 20-25 reps @ 8-9 RPE Auto-regulatory Sets of 20-25 reps @ 8-9 RPE w/ Fatigue percents (progressive weight decrease approach)

Auto-regulatory Sets of 2 reps @ 9-10 RPE w/ Fatigue percents (progressive weight decrease approach) Pre-set 3-6 sets X 1-2 reps @ 8-10 RPE Auto-regulatory Sets of 1-2 reps @ 8-10 RPE w/ Fatigue percents (progressive weight decrease approach) or use tendo unit Pre-set 2-4 sets X 8-10 reps @ 9-10 RPE Auto-regulatory Sets of 8-10 reps @ 9-10 RPE w/ Fatigue percents (less-reps approach) Pre-set 2-4 sets X 15-20 reps @ 9-10 RPE Auto-regulatory Sets of 15-20 reps @ 9-10 RPE w/ Fatigue percents (less-reps approach)

Muscular endurance

BEFORE WE MOVE ON, LETS SUMMARIZE! We have covered a lot of ground here, so we should do a quick summary before we go into the application of it. Most of the information that was covered is general in its nature. That means it can be used in training for sports not just strength-sports. I have explained three levels of planning or Three Zoom Levels when analyzing training systems. First level deals with training periods, competition calendar, long term athlete development and such. Second Level deals with definition of key motor abilities needed to succeed in a sport and it deals with three approaches used to organize their development. Here we talked about parallel development used in complex-parallel or traditional approach, serial development used in sequential or block approach and a blend between the two with emphasis/pendulum approach. Each of this approaches has its own pros and cons, thus they may be optimal for a given athlete, for a given goals under a given context and they may not be. It must be said that block systems can utilize delayed training effects via acute over-reaching causing training loads, or may utilize residual training effects. This depends on the design of the block system and of course load planning under the Third Zoom level. Third Zoom level deals with finding optimal training tools methods, exercises and loads to develop/maintain motor abilities defined by the Second Zoom level. The term load was discussed, along with their principal components intensity, volume, intensiveness/effort and training frequency. The use of RPE scale was also explained. Training

frequency was covered under the idea of work capacity development. Different types of microcycle was discussed, along with different combos of intensity and volume. Volume and intensity phases (mesocycles) were discussed from the aspect of load planning for advanced athletes. Confusion created by misunderstood linear periodization into western periodization was discussed too. Concept of autoregulatory training was explained, along with using volume (and thus loading) control with Fatigue Percents. All of this mentioned stuff can be applied to all sports, because this is general training theory. In most of the sports strength training is only a training component within more greater system. The role of strength training in non-strength sports is a development of functional muscles mass, relative or absolute strength, explosive strength, reactive strength and injury prevention. This makes planning of strength training for non-strength sports more easier than planning of the strength training for strength sports, where the development of the strength is sole purpose of the training system. For this reason, the development of the strength for strength-sports (Olympic weightlifting, powerlifting, strongman, bodybuilding) is much more complex and targeted from different angles. Compared to non-strength athletes where they usually stops at intermediate planning, advanced strength athletes must deal with more complex structure of strength, especially the weak points and factors that limit the expression of their strength potential. So, compared to strength training of non-strength sports where most of the training is about doing cleans, squats, deadlifts, bench, press, rows, chins and lunges and dealing with loading approaches and implementing it into sound training system, advanced strength athletes deals with more complex factors like grip, lockout, bottom and upper strength, gear work, weak points, sticking point etc. This makes planning of their strength training much more complicated. Having that said, using complex-parallel, block or emphasis method to develop strength in nonstrength sports is whole different issue than using them to develop strength in strength sports. Since the most of the information covered in this article till now can be applied to all sorts of sports (general training theory), further information will deal with its application to strength sports. I will try to show you how this info can be applied to planning the training of strength athletes of different qualification.

THE NOVICE LIFTER No matter what sport athlete comes from, if he starts doing serious (not counting wellness experience here) strength training for the first time, he is novice. Be it experienced soccer player, basketball player, Olympic weightlifting beginner, powerlifting beginner or beginner bodybuilder he is usually weak as a kitten and skinny or sometimes fat (although I will not go into nutrition counseling here go to John Berardi and Lyle McDonald for this). The main characteristics of novice lifter is that he needs very simple planning and his strength grows up rapidly. Mark Rippetoe provides excellent explanation of all phases of the lifter in Practical Programming book, and his work will be used here as a template. Here is a short overview of novice characteristics: 1. Novices progress from training session to training session (Linear progression in weight - PBs) 2. Novices need small number of lifts

3. Novice will not develop overtraining that easily and on the other hand, if they do, the signs will be hard visible (which is bad). 4. The more advanced the athlete, the longer the off-period and the drastic the reduction in weight and volume needed. 5. If novice start to stuck, simple off-day (with reduced weight) is enough to recover them. 6. If the unload is used, weight should be reduced for 10% and the cycle should begin once again. 7. If the novice show constant need for off-day, then he should progress toward intermediate level. 8. The end of novice phase is marked by performance plateau occurring sometime between the third and ninth month of training, with variations due to individual differences.

The goal of novice phase is to learn to lift (develop technique) and develop strength. Rippetoe suggest using 5 reps per set, because this allow both increase in strength and mass gain (depending on the nutrition and other training) without the disruption of the technique due too much reps per set. This also allows easier progression in weight (e.g. you can use greater weight jump if you use 5 reps per set, then 10 reps per set). Yet again, the design of strength training program for novice lifter depends on the goals of that program, other training components (for non-strength athletes), training phase, etc. But basically, all novice can start on a program similar to Starting Strength Model outlined by Mark Rippetoe.

Monday Squat Bench Press/Press Chin-Ups

Wednesday Squat Press/Bench Press Deadlift

Friday Squat Bench Press/Press Pull-Ups

Taken from Rippetoe, Mark (2007). Practical Programming . Aasgaard Company Squatting, deadlifting, benching, pressing, rowing and pulling are basically all that is needed. Variation will off course depends on an individual, his sport etc, etc. For example, here is the generic variation I love to use with novices:

Training A Squat Bench Press Barbell Rowing Lunge (or Split Squat)

Training B Squat Military Press Chins/Pull-ups w/band (or Lat pull-down) RDL

Training can be done 2-3 times per week and Total Body Split is preferable in the novice phase. Depending on the circumstances one may utilize Total-Total-Upper; Total-Lower-Upper; Lower-UpperUpper; Total-Upper-Upper as an example for non-strength athletes that started lifting during the in-season and want their legs fresh for the match on sat-sun. Note to those athletes: expect soreness and heavy legs for about 1-2 weeks since starting this program anyway. This is normal adaptation stiffness when introducing new high-intensity component to your training.

Lower Lower 1 Squat Lower 2 RDL Lunge (or Split Squat) Upper 2 Upper 1

Upper Bench Barbell Rowing Military Press Chins/Pull-ups

I found that teaching Romanian Deadlift, which is IMO the hardest exercise to teach due back position awareness, for this sole reason I find it the most usable. The athletes will learn how to keep neutral position, and when weights go over 60kg for RDL I slowly introduce Dead Lift (because plate size and bar heigh on the floor). Learning back position awareness in a long term is something you want your athletes to develop. Sometimes I dont teach Deadlift if the athlete is too tall or lacks flexibility, until he is able to utilize good technique. To teach squat I use box. I dont do powerlifting squats (wide stance, low bar position), but rather a variation similar to Olympic squatting style (high bar position, medium-comfortable stance, heels shoulder wide, toes slightly out depending on the comfort). I also demand for key things to be proper and other things, like personal style and comfort, I let athletes choose by themselves (this is something like hands-off approach we talked about before). We are all different. I use the box to teach them buttback and sitting down with weight on the heels. Sometimes they need to sit on the box in order to fix their posture, etc, but usually I ask them to slightly touch a box. After a given number of sets, or training sessions, during the middle of the set I tell them that I am going to pull out the box and voila they squat. I ask for parallel depth (quads parallel to floor), but some athletes lack hip and ankle mobility to do it without flexing their backs or going to toes. I couldnt do it either when starting, so my squat depth increased over time and I am now able to squat very deeply with spine in neutral and knees aligned. You can use box again but this time play with its height. After some time let them try lower height box and start all over until they are able to squat to parallel. Along with back position awareness, with athletes who cannot squat to parallel, RDLs are excellent way to develop posterior chain. To teach athletes RDL, I use various techniques and isometrics seems to work just fine for couple of sets, training sessions or weeks. Same goes for all the lifts if athletes sucks at dynamic movement try isometric holds for 10-30sec. Then while he is holding a position fix his posture or cue. Another thing that worked for me when teaching RDLs (when I tried to teach 30 soccer players how to do it), was make them stand with their backs near the wall. As they start to RDL, tell them to touch a wall with their butts. Keeps the spine neutral, knees slightly bent and chest up. This will teach them to push the butt back. Another thing I used with recreation athletes (we had women of 3050 doing RDLs) is to mimic Japanese bow salute. Cuing at the right time comes from experience and working with very movement stupid (low awareness of their own movements) athletes. Reps per set are usually 5 when learning out, but can be different during/after the learning period depending on the age of the athlete, physical state, muscle mass goals, injuries etc. Here is the table that me and my colleague Ognjen Mili developed for the purpose of LTAD (long -term athlete development) plan when we worked at tennis club together. Exercises Boys: 9-11 Boys: 12-13 Boys: 14-15 Boys: 16-17 Boys: 18+

Girls: 8-10 Primary Secondary Auxiliary 12-15 reps Complexes Circuits

Girls: 11-12 10-15 reps Complexes Circuits

Girls: 13-14 8-12 10-12 10-12 12-15 reps

Girls: 15-16 5-10 8-12 8-12 12-15 reps

Girls: 17+ 1-5 5-10 8-12 12-15 reps

Corrective/prehab

We have used this table when planning complex-parallel (concurrent) strength training utilizingPriority Lifts method (see Concurrent Strategies in Strength Training) for intermediate lifters (non-strength athletes). For novices look at Primary and Secondary categories. Primary can include squat, bench and press, while Secondary may include Chins, Rows, RDL and Lunges (or Split Squats) depending on the sport, athlete, etc. Because the goals of strength training for novice lifters are technique, strength and usually muscle mass, one may wonder what is the best approach to plan the development of those abilities (Second Zoom Level). Well, since they are beginners, whatever they do correctly, they will gain strength, muscle and learn technique. So, basically doing sets of 5 reps will develop both mass (depending on nutrition and other training), strength and technique. This can be considered complex-parallel, since the training effect will spill-over to various motor abilities/qualities and they will be developed more or less simultaneously. Thus, there is no need for specialized loads to directly aim at different motor abilities/qualities compared to intermediates and advanced athletes.

There is no need for more complex approach (sequential, complex-parallel, emphasis). On the other side, if we are talking about non-strength athletes whose strength training is integrated with other components into a sound training system, then the choice of Second Zoom Level depends on their level (in their sport), training phase etc. The Second Zoom Level will include more training components not just strength training compared to strength athletes

Bodybuilders may start to argue that there is a need to do 8-12 reps per set. But I guess with proper nutrition, both 5 reps guys and 8-12 reps guys will have similar if not the same results over time (if the resulting weight on the bar is the same). Anyway, the first phase of strength increase is achieved via inter- and intra-muscular coordination and there is very little muscle mass increase, so there is no real need for bodybuilding methods. Stick to 5 reps per set until you develop a minimum amount of strength (intermediate phase) and then start doing bodybuilding methods. Increased strength will later allow you to lift greater weights for reps and thus stimulate growth more easily. Before we move on, lets define the term Personal Best (PB) or Personal Record (PR) in strength training. Theoretically, PB is an increase in strength. Practically, this means achieving something you havent achieved before and demonstrating it, by lifting more weight, lifting the same weight for more reps or lifting it for more sets. For example, if your 1RM moves from 100kg to 102,5kg its PB. If your 5RM moves from 85kg to 87.2kg its PB. If you do multiple sets, for example 5x5 and manage to do 80kg, but you suddenly do it for 5x6 or 5x5 with 82,5kg, its PBs. Thus PB is having more weight on the bar than before for a given reps and sets. What about you make PB and dont train for a year and then restart training? Are all lifts below your old PB considered as non-PB lifts until you surpass your old PB? In reality yes they are, but when it comes to planning they are all new PBs, because your strength level is lower now. So, PB is a all-time record, but it is also based on your current strength level and previous strength cycles. Another interesting point is RPE. What if you managed to do 3x5 w/100kg @7 RPE that couple of weeks ago seemed like 10? Yes, your strength has improved, but this is NOT PB! This can happen in unloading microcycles and in adjustment microcycles and its great (this shows you are stronger), but PB means surpassing previous cycle weight/reps/sets or showing that new level of strength not perceiving it. There could be couple of phases of novices IMO (depending on the sport). The following examples are just hypothetical for average lifter, but can be used for powerlifter, Olympic lifter and bodybuilder. Lets review them. Phase 1. Athletes start to learn technique of the basic compound lifts for 5 reps for 3 sets. RPE is around 6-7, although he doesnt know that yet. On every training session you increase weight on the bar and achieve PB, until load becomes 9-10 RPE. Take small step forward to avoid stalling too soon. If the athlete is unable to finish 3 sets with 5 reps on a given weight, repeat the weights for 3 times. Focus hard on technique, go as fast as you can on a way up, take more rest between sets, up to 5 min. If this doesnt help then deload take 10-15% for that exercise and start over with progressively adding the weight. The first exercise to stall is military press. The less muscle mass involved with the exercise the sooner the stall with happen. Try deloading 2-3 times before moving to a next phase. If number of lifts falls down over training sessions (i.e. 5/5/4, 4/3/2...) then use harder deload take 20% of the bar and do only one set for one week, then proceed to two sets and finally three. Here is the hypothetical example for squats:

Week #1 40kg 5/5/5 @7 45kg 5/5/5 @7 50kg 5/5/5

Week #2 52.5kg 5/5/5 @8 55kg 5/5/5 @8 57kg 5/5/5

Week #3 60kg 5/5/5 @8 62kg 5/5/5 @8.5 65kg 5/5/5 @9

Week #4 67kg 5/5/5 @8.5 70kg 5/5/5 @9 72kg 5/5/5 @10

Week #5 75kg 5/5/5 @10 77kg 5/4/4 @10 77kg 5/5/4

Week #6 77kg 5/5/5 @10 70kg 5/5/5 @7-8 72kg 5/5/5

@8 Week #7 75kg 5/5/5 @8 77kg 5/5/5 @9 80kg 5/5/5 @10 Week #13 90kg 5/5/5 @9 92kg 5/5/5 @9.5 95kg 5/5/5 @10 97kg 5/4/3 @10

@8.5 Week #8 82kg 5/5/4 @10 82kg 5/4/3 @10 65kg x5 @6 Week #14 97kg 5/4/4 @10 97kg 5/5/4 @10 87kg 5/5/5 @8 90kg 5/5/5 @8

Week #9 67kg x5 @6 70kg x5 @7 70kg 5/5 @7 Week #15 92kg 5/5/5 @8.5 95kg 5/5/5 @9 97kg 5/5/5 @9.5 100kg5/5/5 @10

Week #10 72kg 5/5 @7 72kg 5/5 @7 72kg 5/5/5 @7 Week #16 102kg5/5/4 @10 102kg5/5/5 @10 105kg4/4/4 @10 Unload / move

@10 Week #11 75kg 5/5/5 @7 77kg 5/5/5 @7.5 80kg 5/5/5 @8 Week #17

@8 Week #12 82kg 5/5/5 @8 85kg 5/5/5 @8.5 87kg 5/5/5 @9 Week #18

Try to milk as much PBs within phase 1. As it becomes too much strenuous (slow improvement, too much RPE, technique issues, the need for easy days, slow bar speed, etc), move to the next phase. Also, during this phase, find out how much weeks you are able to hit PBs after first stall-out and how many of them. It will provide valuable information in designing mesocycles during later stages. Phase 2. During this phase you should include new exercise, but do it slowly over time. This will provide easier days and provide new training stimulus to increase strength. After this time athlete is very proficient with basic moves, learns RPE system, know when and how to deaload and how this affect his performance. I would start learning deadlift by now (if RDL is more than 60kg, for example and if they show good form on bottom of the deadlift) and replaced one squat workout for it. You can also include front squat variations and start learning clean/snatch using top-down progression (learn catch, learn shrug&jump from power position, learn jump&catch), and as deadlift moves up, start doing clean/snatch from the floor. Also, you can start moving reps to higher or lower zone for a given goals (relative strength / muscular hypertrophy). Training volume (number of sets) can increase over time slightly. All exercises have equal emphasis in a training session (same or similar volume, intensity and effort). Total body split is still preferred method. Training A Clean Technique Squat Bench Press Bulgarian Split squats Chin-ups Training B Jerk Technique Dead Lift Dips Lunges Barbell Rowing Training C Snatch Technique Front Squat Military Press RDL Pull-ups

There is a need for regular deload periods, so the mesocycle (training block) can be arranged using following microcycles. The duration of loading microcycles depends of adaptability of the athlete, or the rate of the improvement before stalling out.

Week #1 Adjustment

Week #2 Adjustment

Week #3 Loading

Week #4 Loading

Week #5 Loading

Week #6 Loading

Week #7 Recovery

2x5 @7-8 Learn new exercises

3x5 @8-9 Achive training volume

3x5 @9-10 PBs

3x5 @9-10 PBs

3x5 @9-10 PBs

3x5 @910 PBs

1x5 @7 Recovery

Try to find out how much loading microcycles you can manage, how much PBs you have achieved before stalling and needing an unload. This will give you a basic template for further phases. Try to milk as much improvement from this phase too. Phase 3. When introduction of new exercises doesnt seem to prevent staleness, then playing with loading parameters will (for some time). This involves playing with volume and intensity within loading microcycles. Variations in reps and sets will provide new training stimuli and prevent boredom. All exercise during a training session have equal importance and deserve same training emphasis. The following hypothetical example will show you what I mean, and hopefully youll get the point.

Week #1 Adjustment 2x6 @7-8 Learn new exercises

Week #2 Adjustment 3x6 @8-9 Achieve training volume

Week #3 Loading 4x6 @9-10 PBs

Week #4 Loading 3x5 @9-10 PBs

Week #5 Loading 2x4 @9-10 PBs

Week #6 Impact 2x5 2x3 @9-10 PBs

Week #7 Recovery 1x5 @7 Recovery

THE INTERMEDIATE LIFTER The main characteristics of the intermediate lifter are the following: 1. Intermediates cannot put an equal emphasis on all exercises in terms of volume, intensity and effort during a single training session, and/or during all training sessions within microcycle. Thus, they need training variety (The variety lies in the way basic exercises are applied, and not in a bunch of new exercises Practical Programming , p.177) in training intensity, volume, effort, frequency and methods used. 2. 3. Intermediates need more directed loading to develop given motor ability Intermediates need greater stress (load - more sets and volume and greater intensity) to cause improvements, but they need more rest (thus the need for week variety) and improvements are slower to come and smaller 4. Work capacity (the ability of the body to recover) improves over time, but in absolute terms. For example, when novice squats 100kg for 3 sets of 5 he is challenged in terms of recovery ability, but once he is able to squat 150kg for 5 sets of 5 months after, doing 100kg for 3 sets of 5 is not challenging in

terms of recovery ability, nor it provides great training effect. But, will athlete recover in the same time from 150kg for 5 sets of 5, as he was recovered moths before with 100kg for 3 sets of 5? Maybe yes, maybe no. This is why absolute work capacity (100kg) certainly goes up, and I guess relative work capacity (as percentage of 1RM) goes down, stays the same, or slowly raise, and demand greater recovery time 5. 6. Intermediates can hit PBs from week to week in general Intermediates need regular easier days within microcycle, and this comes together with number one characteristic 7. Intermediates need regular and more longer unload period compared to novices Compared to novices where every training effects spills-over to numerous motor abilities, intermediates need more directed training load to develop a given motor ability/quality.

Basically, intermediates are ready for a true complex-parallel (concurrent) approach, if the goal of strength training is the development of numerous motor abilities/tasks simultaneously. Again, we must differ between strength training as a training systems component for non -strength sports, and strength training for strength sports. For non-strength sports you can use complex-parallel approach for strength training (development of explosive strength, strength and muscle mass), or you can arrange strength training in a different fashion to fill your athletic needs. Anyway, the similarities in planning of the strength training are still large, and that is why non-strength athletes can learn great info from intermediate strength planning. Please note that I am NOT trying to say that intermediates must do a complex-parallel approach. I am just trying to say that complex-parallel approach is still a great solution if they need to work on more

motor abilities, before they need more advanced solutions in advanced stage. There is certainly a possibility where you can/must use more serial approach to develop motor abilities. To deal with characteristics of the intermediate lifter and develop multiple abilities/qualities simultaneously (concurrently) one may choose multiple solutions. I have talked about Wide Pyramids, DUP (Daily Undulating Periodization) and Priority lifts in Concurrent Strategies in Strength Training. Basically, since intermediates cannot put equal emphasis (in terms of volume, intensity and effort) on all exercises during a single training sessions, priorities must be set. They need exercise emphasis. Also, since they cannot hit PBs during every training session for a given movement, you simply cannot expect doing 3x/wk squats and hitting PBs every time. You would need more easier days and load alternations. One solution is Texas method. I have talked about Volume/Intensity phases and their purpose as different ways to increase strength. Well, in Texas method they are not phases, but rather workouts. Take an example for the squats: Volume 5x5 @8-9RPE Recovery 3x5 @6-7 RPE Intensity 1x5 @9-10RPE (PB)

Note that you can arrange exercises in Volume/Recovery/Intensity fashion, or you can arrange training sessions. For example Training Sessions Volume Squat 5x5 @8-9RPE Bench Press 5x5 @8-9RPE Pendlay Row 5x5 @8-9RPE Recovery Squat 3x5 @6-7 RPE Bench Press 3x5 @6-7 RPE Pendlay Row 3x5 @6-7 RPE Intensity Squat 1x5 @9-10RPE (PB) Bench Press 1x5 @9-10RPE (PB) Pendlay Row 1x5 @9-10RPE (PB) Exercises Squat Squat 1x5 @9-10RPE (PB) Bench Press 5x5 @8-9RPE Pendlay Row 3x5 @6-7 RPE Pendlay Pendlay Row 1x5 @9-10RPE (PB) Squat 5x5 @8-9RPE Bench Press 3x5 @6-7 RPE Bench Press Bench Press 1x5 @9-10RPE (PB) Pendlay Row 5x5 @8-9RPE Squat 3x5 @6-7 RPE

This example can be used for more serial/sequential development of abilities, or can be used as an idea of load alternation in later phases of the intermediate phases. Another solution would be Upper-Lower split, or some other split based on exercise importance. Upper-lower split allows you to increase training load, but reduces the training frequency. For example, instead of doing squats 3x/wk as in novice phase, utilizing upper-lower split you would do them 1.5x/wk (first week 1x, second week 2x). This will allow you to use greater load and have greater recovery time. Upper-Lower split is actually very good solution, and we will come back to it later.

Priority lifts method, according to exercise importance, classify every exercise into separate groups. The groups can be sport-oriented or movement-pattern oriented. For example, instead of doing Volume/Recovery/Intensity for squats you could utilize secondary and auxiliary exercises for the squat movement on every training session. Primary Squats 3x5 @9-10 Secondary Front Squats 3x5 @8-9 Auxiliary Split Squat 3x5 @7-8

If you establish different repetition brackets for every exercise group, you can easility utilize complex-parallel approach. More on this in Concurrent Strategies in Strength Training. Primary (Maximum Strength) Squats 5x2 @9-10 Secondary (Speed) Box Squats DE 8x2 @6-7 Auxiliary (Hypertrophy) Split Squat 3x8-12 @8-9

To provide an example of planning of strength training for intermediate athletes, I will assume that they are pursuing development of maximum strength, functional hypertrophy and explosive strength (using Olympic lifts in this example instead of DE squats and presses), at the same time (concurrent approach). One can also utilize more serial approaches, especially with non-strength athletes, but this would depend on Second Zoom Level, athlete level, sport, phase, etc. For sure, there are numerous solutions, and I am only trying to practically utilize the theoretical concepts we have talked about in concurrent scheme. I strongly suggest taking a look at Concurrent Strategies in Strength Training article, because I will use Priority lifts method as an example of concurrent planning for intermediate lifter. In the mentioned article there is thorough description of this method. Another highly suggested book isPractical Programming , from which I have extracted most of the planning principles of strength training. Phase 1. During this phase, athlete or coach decides whether he or she wants to utilize Total Body Split or Upper/Lower, or some other form of split system based on exercise importance, or training schedule (for non-strength athletes). There are pros and cons to all of them, and there may be a situation where you may/must utilize numerous split solutions (for example in Fatigue/Frequency Based Cycles aimed at work capacity development). Good intermediate system is Joe Kenn Tier System , in which coach Kenn utilize Total Body Split and presents both concurrent (modified WSBB method) and more sequential approach, and also presents numerous mesocycle solutions. Coachs Kenn philosophy has influ enced me in great degree. Another example of Upper/Lower Split utilizing concurrent approach is Joe DeFrancos WS4SB system. Depending on the context you may select Total or Upper/Lower system, or something in between. For the sole purpose of this article, lets design Upper/Lower Split for intermediate athlete with concurrent goals, taking into account characteristics of intermediate lifters. Training A (Monday) A. Clean (DE) B. Squat (ME) C. RDL (RE) D. Abs Training B (Tuesday) A. Bench Press (ME) B1. DB Bench Press (RE) B2. Pendlay Row (RE) Training C (Thursday) A. Snatch (DE) B. DeadLift (ME) C. Lunge (RE) D. Abs Training D (Friday) A. Press (ME) B1. DB Press (RE) B2. Pull-Ups (RE) C. Beach Work (RE)

C. Beach Work (RE) Upper and Lower body may be rotated, if the heavy lower body workout negatively influences upper body ME work. The design of mesocycle may be something like this: Protocol DE (Oly) ME RE Week #1 Adjustment 2x2 @7-8 3x2 @8-9 2x6-8 @8-9 Learn new exercises Week #2 Adjustment 3x2 @8-9 5x2 @8-9 3x6-8 @8-9 Achieve training volume If one wants to do only squats instead of deadlifts, or only bench press instead of press, then the first workout may be Intensity (i.e. 3x2 @9-10) and the second can be Volume workout (i.e. 6x3 @8-9), utilizing ideas from Texas method. Anyway, there should be a variations used, if the same movement is repeated more than once within a microcycle, with the same goal (maximal strength, hypertrophy, explosive strength). Keep the intensity high (or vary it slightly), while changing the quality of work done, like number of reps, sets, speed. This is a critical factor to avoid premature staleness and psychological boredom. Higher intensity work must be varied over the week, if it is going to be used for longer periods of time. The characteristic of Phase 1 of intermediate athlete is that he or she cannot put equal emphasis on every exercise in a workout (or all workouts), thus there need to be exercise emphasis involved (Priority Lifts method, or volume/intensity/effort combos). Another characteristic of Phase 1 is that there is no need for set/rep alternations during the mesocycle. If one wishes to use auto-regulated training, be my guest, just keep it simple. There is no need for Fatigue Percents, use simple Fatigue Stop method. If there is a need to do both Bench Press/Press and Squat/Deadlift in a single workout, one may utilize Intensity loading for the first exercise, and Volume or Recovery loading for the second. Here is an example. Training A (Monday) A. Dead Lift (Intensity) B. Squat (Volume) C. RDL (RE) D. Abs Training B (Tuesday) A. Bench Press (Intensity) B. Press (Volume) C1. DB Bench Press (RE) C2. Pendlay Row (RE) Training C (Thursday) A. Squat (Intensity) B. DeadLift (Recovery) C. Lunge (RE) D. Abs Training D (Friday) A. Press (Intensity) B. Bench Press (Volume) C2.. DB Press (RE) C1. Pull-Ups (RE) Week #3 Loading 4x2 @910 6x2 @910 4x6-8 @9-10 PBs Week #4 Loading 4x2 @910 6x2 @910 4x6-8 @9-10 PBs Week #5 Loading 4x2 @910 6x2 @910 4x6-8 @9-10 PBs Week #6 Loading 4x2 @910 6x2 @910 4x6-8 @9-10 PBs 2x6-8 @78 Recovery 3x2 @7-8 Week #7 Recovery 2x2 @7-8

Heavy, limit-level deadlift are very stressful, making Volume protocol (sets across) a bad choice, thats why I used Recovery protocol instead, just to keep the deadlift groove in place. Anyway, this depends on the work capacity of the lifter and training frequency. Volume workout for deadlift may be used if frequency is three trainings per week instead of four for example, but again, it depends. Similar approach can be used with Olympic lifts if done more frequently. The key is volume/intensity/effort alternations, or variations of higher intensity work in terms of intensity used, effort expressed and volume done. Phase 2. Compared to Phase 1, in Phase 2, athlete need more mesocycle variations. Variations can be implemented by utilizing (1) different reps/set during mesocycle, (2)volume/intensity microcycles and (3) load alternations. There may be more of solutions, but I am too lazy to find them. Use this just as an example. As an example of reps/set alternations within mesocycle, we can utilize the following hypothetical solution: Protocol DE (Oly) ME RE Week #1 Adjustment 3x2 @8-9 3x3 @8-9 3x6 @8-9 Achieve training volume Week #2 Loading 4x2 @9-10 5x3 @9-10 4x6 @9-10 PBs Week #3 Loading 2,1,2,1 5,4,3,2,1 4x8 @9-10 PBs Week #4 Loading 4x1 @9-10 6x1 @9-10 4x6 @9-10 PBs Week #5 Recovery 2x1 @7-8 4x1 @7-8 2x6 @7-8 Recovery

Alternations in reps/set can provide variety and prevent boredom. Another solution is to devisevolume/intensity microcycles. Protocol Week #1 Adjustment 3x2 @8-9 3x3 @8-9 3x6 @8-9 Achieve training volume Week #2 Loading (Volume) 6x2 @8-9 6x3 @8-9 4x8 @8-9 Week #3 Loading (Intensity) 3x2 @9-10 3x3 @9-10 2x8 @9-10 PBs Week #4 Loading (Volume) 6x1 @8-9 6x2 @8-9 4x6 @8-9 Week #5 Loading (Intensity) 3x1 @9-10 3x2@9-10 2x6 @9-10 PBs Week #6 Recovery 2x1 @7-8 2x1 @7-8 2x6 @7-8 Recovery

DE (Oly) ME RE

More advanced mesocycle structure that utilize volume/intensity microcycles involves alternations of volume/intensity loading for a given motor ability/quality alternatively. Take an example: Protocol DE (Oly) ME RE Week #1 Adjustment 3x2 @8-9 3x3 @8-9 3x6 @8-9 Achieve training volume Week #2 Loading 6x2 @8-9 3x3 @9-10 4x8 @8-9 PBs Week #3 Loading 3x2 @9-10 6x3 @8-9 2x8 @9-10 PBs Week #4 Loading 6x1 @8-9 3x2@9-10 4x6 @8-9 PBs Week #5 Loading 3x1 @9-10 6x2 @8-9 2x6 @9-10 PBs Week #6 Recovery 2x1 @7-8 2x1 @7-8 2x6 @7-8 Recovery

In all mentioned examples, auto-regulatory training may be utilized, with Fatigue Stops or same Fatigue Percents (choose one load/stress level and stick to it over a whole mesocycle). Another approach that may be utilized is different microstructure organization, or using microcycles of different loading/stress level. Protocol DE (Oly) ME RE Week #1 Adjustment 2x2 @8-9 4x2 @8-9 3x6-8 @8-9 Achieve training volume Week #2 Loading 4x2 @9-10 6x2 @9-10 4x6-8 @910 PBs Week #3 Shock 6x1 @10 8x1 @10 5x6 @10 PBs / Shock Week #4 Recovery 2x2 @7-8 2x2 @7-8 2x6 @7-8 Recovery Week #5 Loading 4x2 @9-10 6x2 @9-10 4x6-8 @910 PBs Week #6 Recovery 2x2 @7-8 2x2 @7-8 2x6 @7-8 Recovery

Different Volume/Intensity microcycle combos can be utilized to provide mesocycle variety. You can also play with frequency of training within microcycle to provide training variety and stimuli. When using auto-regulatory training, one can utilize different Fatigue Percents (FP) to induce different (microcycle) load. For example: Protocol DE (Oly) ME RE Week #1 Adjustment 2s @8-9 w/3% FP 2s @8-9 w/3% FP 6-8s @8-9 w/3% FP Achieve training volume Week #2 Loading 2s @9-10 w/5% FP 2s @9-10 w/5% FP 6-8s @9-10 w/5% FP PBs Week #3 Shock 1s @10 w/10% FP 1s @10 w/10% FP 6s @10 w/5% FP PBs / Shock Week #4 Recovery 2s @7-8 w/0% FP 2s @7-8 w/0% FP 6-8s @7-8 w/0% FP Recovery Week #5 Loading 2s @9-10 w/5% FP 2s @9-10 w/5% FP 6-8s @9-10 w/5% FP PBs Week #6 Recovery 2s @7-8 w/0% FP 2s @7-8 w/0% FP 6-8s @7-8 w/0% FP Recovery

The most advanced or complex method for intermediates would involve a combination of volume/intensity or rep/set alternations with different load/stress level microcycles, utilizing autoregulatory training using Fatigue Percents or using ordinary pre-set number of sets. Solutions are numerous if you understand the principles behind it. When introducing new training days, they should be medium in volume and medium in effort (@7-8 RPE) and slowly the effort raises over weeks or moths. Most of the athletes in non-strength sports will find four strength training days a maximum allowable anyway. But more advanced weightlifters or powerlifters with high work capacity may utilize more frequent training schedule. At some level, the ability to increase training volume to the maximum tolerable level may determine the ultimate success of the athlete. Higher total week volume may approve for more training days, but before more volume is added, coach or athlete himself must analyze the cause of plateau and make sure it is volume-related (not enough volume) before adding more, slowly gauged volume of training. Utilization of Frequency/Fatigue Cycles can also be introduced. The Frequency/Fatigue Cycles are aimed at Work Capacity development. Individual Frequency/Fatigue cycle may last couple of mesocycles.

THE ADVANCED LIFTER Basic characteristics of the advanced athlete are the following: 1. They cannot develop everything at once. They need to prioritize the training goals or they will suffer from overtraining and limited progress 2. The cumulative/delayed training effects of series of workouts becomes more and more important. PBs are achived every couple of weeks or months. 3. Training must be organized into longer periods of time, and those periods progress from higher volume and lower intensity toward lower volume and higher intensity 4. Sometimes the characteristic number three doesnt always apply, especially if the aim of training block is to produce acute over-reaching and later usage of delayed training effects Compared to intermediate athletes, advanced athletes need greater training load to further improve a given motor ability/characteristic, but cannot improve more than couple of them at a given moment, because total training load would be too much for their work capacity. This is why complexparallel approach is very difficult to successfully utilize, except eventually at the first phase of advanced level.

In the mentioned concurrent examples for intermediate level, athletes seeks to improve everything at once: Olympic lifts, squat, deadlifts, benches, chins, presses and rows, while also pounding secondary and auxiliary movements for muscle mass. This will work for a decent amount of time (if the week structure is optimally organized based on athletes adaptability and work capacity, along with other factors), but after some time you will soon find out that you simply cannot do everything at once. Trying to increase clean performance will leave you fatigued for squats. Squats will leave you fatigued for presses, etc, etc. This is the time when you need to prioritize your training, you need to focus on couple of things while maintaining others (unless you utilize block approach where you are using training residuals instead of maintenance loads). The usage of block approach or emphasis approach is now a necessity. In my humble opinion there are three things that may direct prioritization in strength training: 1. Movement pattern. One may decide to pursuit Olympic lifts (or Clean, or Snatch, or Jerk), one may

decide to concentrate on improving his bench press, or one may decide to concentrate on his deltoids development. In bodybuilding world this is called muscle specialization. 2. Motor ability/quality. One may decide to pursuit relative strength and maintain his hypertrophy, or

one may maintain fat levels and strength while aiming for maximal muscular hypertrophy, etc, etc. 3. A combination. One may decide to pursuit his speed in his bench press and work on his sticking

point, while also maintaining strength and hypertrophy in his pecs and the rest of his body. To provide couple of examples of planning of strength training for advanced athletes, I devised couple of phases. Please note that there can be greater number of phase depending on the sport and the level of the athlete, so keep in mind that these are devised only for the example purpose. Phase 1. The first phase is basically same concurrent approach as with intermediates, yet it is organized to take into equation the second and the third characteristic of the advanced lifter. In the first phase, advanced athletes are still able to cope with concurrent approach, but their training need to be organized into longer periods of time, and those periods progress from higher volume and lower intensity toward lower volume and higher intensity. There could be numerous solutions to this, for example (a) linear periodization that utilize smooth volume/intensity transition or (b) volume/intensity blocks that utilize abrupt volume/intensity transition. I will expand more on the second example. Phase 1 can be organized into longer duration volume/intensity blocks, that last from 2-3 weeks to a longer duration (whole mesocycle), depending on the level of the lifter and his work capacity. Volume Phase Protocol DE (Oly) ME RE Week #1 6x2 @8-9 6x3 @8-9 4x8 @8-9 Week #2 6x2 @8-9 6x3 @8-9 4x8 @8-9 Week #3 6x2 @9-10 6x3 @9-10 4x8 @9-10 PBs Week #4 3x1 @8-9 3x2@8-9 2x6 @8-9 Intensity Phase Week #5 3x1 @9-10 3x2@9-10 2x6 @9-10 Week #6 3x1 @9-10 3x2@9-10 2x6 @9-10 PBs

The Volume Phase can include higher workout-frequency, greater number of sets within workouts to induce greater total weekly training, but the relative intensity and effort should be less. In the

intensity Phase, the volume of training goes down (total weekly and per training session) to allow fatigue to dissipate and strength to realize. After the Volume/Intensity Phases one or two microcycles should be utilized to provide recovery. With advanced stages of Phase 1, microcycle variations can and should be utilized. The ideas presented in Phase 2 of intermediate lifter. They include (1) different reps/set, and (2) load alternations during volume/intensity phases. This should prevent boredom and staleness. When this organization starts to induce issues with recovery, one simple solution can be utilized before utilizing more serial approaches. To reduce total training volume, one can organize Volume/Intensity Phases per motor ability/quality instead of using general phases as before. Protocol DE (Oly) ME RE Week #1 3x1 @8-9 6x3 @8-9 2x6 @8-9 Week #2 3x1 @9-10 6x3 @8-9 2x6 @9-10 Week #3 3x1 @9-10 6x3 @9-10 2x6 @9-10 PBs Week #4 6x2 @8-9 3x2@8-9 4x8 @8-9 Week #5 6x2 @8-9 3x2@9-10 4x8 @8-9 Week #6 6x2 @9-10 3x2@9-10 4x8 @9-10 PBs

With the example above, one can see that the emphasis (using different Volume/Intensity Phases ) is used for a given motor ability/quality over 3 week period. This start to look more and more to more serial approach of developing motor abilities/qualities. As with previous example, one can utilize (1) different reps/set, and (2) load alternations during volume/intensity phases to prevent boredom and staleness in later stages of Phase 1. Phase 2. In the Phase 2 of the advanced lifter, one must start to use more serial approaches to develop motor abilities/qualities. Depending on the context, goals and athletes (and coaches preferences), one may utilize more block-like or emphasis-like approach. To provide some examples, I will utilize more emphasis-like approach. Before going on further, one must devise loading parameters in the form of loading andretaining. Please note that emphasis is certainly a load issues, thus one may emphasize a development of a g iven motor ability/quality by utilizing different training frequency, intensity, volume. There could be a lot of solution, and I will pick one that Lyle McDonald devised in his Periodization for Bodybuilders series of articles. Lyle presented presented a loading guidelines for loading and maintaining/retaining different motor abilities/qualities. Modified Lyle McDonalds Loading Guidelines Type Loading / Developing Maintaining / Retaining 6-10 sets 2-3 sets Maximum Strength 2-8 sets 1-2 sets Myofibrilar Hypertrophy 3-6 sets 1-2 sets Hypertrophy 1-2 sets 1 set Sarcoplasmatic Hypertrophy / Strength Endurance As I have noted earlier, one can emphasize (1) movement pattern, (2) motor ability/quality or (3) a combination. The more advanced the athlete the more precise the emphasis, for example one may devise

whole training block to work on lockout strength in bench press, or grip work, or even sticking point in squat. As an example for movement pattern emphasis, one may decide to utilize a given approach Example for advanced powerlifter Block #1 Block #1 Block #2 Block #3 General Bulking Squat Bench Press DeadLift Increasing whole body Aiming at increasing ME, Aiming at increasing ME, Aiming at increasing ME, muscle mass and GPP DE, RE in squat DE, RE in bench press DE, RE in deadlift Maintaining ME qualities Maintaining strength in Maintaining strength in Maintaining strength in in bench, squat and DL bench and deadlift squat and deadlift squat and bench press with maintenance loads Maintaining muscle mass Maintaining muscle mass Maintaining muscle mass and GPP and GPP and GPP As an example for motor ability/quality emphasis one may decide to utilize approach similar to this one: Emphasis Method Block #1 Block #2 Muscular Maximal Strength Hypertrophy (RE) (ME) Maximal Strength (ME) Muscular Hypertrophy (RE) Explosive Strength (DE) Explosive Strength (DE)

Emphasis Maintenance Maintenance

Block #3 Explosive Strength (DE) Maximal Strength (ME) Muscular Hypertrophy (RE)

A combination of the two would be most advanced and used with the most advanced lifters. For example in Bench press period one may utilize a specific block aimed at muscle mass and specific block aimed at maximum strength taking strength and weaknesses into equation After picking an approach and working on it a decent amount of time, one can progress over time by using different microcycle variations covered in Phase 2 of intermediate lifter: (1) different reps/set during mesocycle, (2) volume/intensity microcycles and (3) load alternations. This should present a next step in training complexity and should prevent boredom and staleness. After microcycle variations within emphasis block stops to prevent boredom and staleness, one may utilize Volume/Intensity phases within emphasis blocks.

Block #1 Muscular Hypertrophy or Squat Cycle Volume Phase Intensity Phase

Block #2 Maximum Strength or Bench Press Cycle Volume Phase Intensity Phase

Block #3 Explosive Strength or Deadlift Cycle Volume Phase Intensity Phase

If you have read this article carefully, you will notice that with advanced lifters in Phase 2, I utilized more serial approach in Second Zoom Level. As they start to stagnate with Second Zoom Level, I started to utilize more complex load progressions in Third Zoom Level, by using microcycle variations,

later on Volume/Intensity Phases. To provide even more complexity to prevent boredom and staleness, one may utilize different microcycle progressions withing Volume/Intensity Phases. Up till now I utilized first three characteristics of advanced lifters. One can experiment with acute overreaching approach, by utilizing very concentrated load by using high intensity and high volume at the same time for about two or three weeks, and later unloading to allow fatigue to dissipate and strength increase to emerge. One approach that utilize this approach is Hormonal Fluctuation Model and can be found in Practical Programming book. Hopefully you are able to utilize ideas from this article in strength training practice and maybe in some other sports practices as well.

Ab Training for Absolute Bada$$es! by Bret May 25, 2010 26 Comments

Last week T-Nation published the final article of my Inside the Muscles series. This series is the first of its kind; it charted the EMG activity of a bunch of different exercises on various muscles and parts of muscles. Last weeks article was titledBest Ab Exercises. In case you havent read the series, here are the links:

Inside the Muscles

Best Shoulder and Traps Exercises Best Chest and Triceps Exercises Best Back and Biceps Exercises Best Leg, Glute, and Calf Exercises Best Ab Exercises Since EMG measures the nervous systems intent to fire the muscles, which theoretically should be directly related to muscular tension, its very important to perform exercises that work the muscles best. Quite often the exercises that work the muscles best are big, basic exercises like squats (quads), deadlifts, (hamstrings), and chin ups (lats). However, through the use of EMG we find that certain muscles require more innovative exercises like hip thrusts (glutes) and weighted planks (abs) to maximally target the muscles. Sometimes we need to ignore EMG and just focus on sound Biomechanics; some lifts may be very beneficial in teaching coordination and core-control even though their levels of EMG activity may not be very impressive. In this article Id like to show you my favorite abdominal/core exercises.

Human Loaded Front Plank

Although not included in my recent article, last year I conducted an EMG experiment with an extensive variety of ab exercises and found that the ultimate ab and oblique exercise was the weighted front plank. If youve been reading my blog for a while, youll know that Im not a fan of high -rep training. I have nothing against high-reppers, I just hate feeling the burn. To me, heavy singles are the cats pajamas. Much of my innovative approach to training stems from the fact that I cant stand doing sets of 10 reps or more or performing sustained isometrics for longer than 20 seconds. Because of this hatred, I often create ways to make exercises more challenging. I did this with the hip thrust, which is just a glute bridge with extra weight and extra range of motion, and I did this with the plank by adding weight in the form of another human being directly over the low back.

Yes, thats Madonna playing in the background. Deal with it! This should go without saying, but it is critical that one uses proper form and begins at the simplest variation before attempting this exercise. Proper form involves controlling the lumbar spine and preventing the low back from being pulled downward into extension (arching). Start off with a basic front plank, and once you master it begin adding weight gradually in the form of plates. Youll need a partner to put plat es onto your back. When a couple of 45 lb plates is no longer challenging for you, its time to move up to a human being.

In the video above I perform a 23-second isohold with my 220 lb training-partner named Rob on my back. I could probably work my way up to a minute within a month or so if I really wanted to but I guess its just not that important to me at this time as I feel that my core is strong enough.

Band Anti-Rotary Hold I sometimes have to laugh at our industry. We often just do what were told without putting any thought into the matter. Brilliant physical therapist John Pallof created the Pallof press or anti -extension press many years ago. Why is it that we can hold a front plank (anti-extension) or side plank (anti-lateral flexion) for extended time but we arent allowed to do the same isometric -style with anti-rotation training?

I prefer the band or cable anti-rotary hold to the Pallof press. I believe it works the muscles much harder since they cant rest! Start off with the Pallof pr ess, but when you master it move onto the band antirotary hold and dont be afraid to move out really far when using bands. If youre a strong guy like me you can move way out and challenge your core very hard with this movement. It may not appear like it, but this exercise is absolutely brutal! It makes people want to puke its so hard.

Negative Standing Ab-Wheel Rollout

Start off with the basic front plank. When that gets easy, move onto the stability ball rollout or TRX fallout. As soon as that gets easy, move onto the ab wheel rollout from the knees. And when that gets easy, its time to give the negative standing ab-wheel rollout a try. Im not strong enough to perform a concentric repetition from the standing position but I can get an excellent eccentric repetition in without allowing my lumbar spine to enter into extension.

Barbell Suitcase Isometric Hold

The barbell suitcase hold is the ultimate anti-lateral flexion exercise. Its also a great grip exercise once you get really strong. If youre not very strong, you can just use a dumbbell. But once you outgrow the dumbbells, you must move on to a barbell. Ive used 185 lbs for this movement in the past.

Weighted Dead Bugs

Dead bugs are an awesome exercise, just like planks side planks, glute bridges, and bird dogs. However, all of these exercises have one inherent flaw; theyre too easy for advanced individuals. The remedy for this is simple. Once you master bodyweight add resistance in the form of ankle weights and dumbbells. In this video Im using 10-lb ankle weights and 10-lb dumbbells. Dont allow the lumbar spine to extend or flex.

Cable Chops and Lifts

Chops and lifts are kickass exercises that integrate a ton of muscle and help the entire body to become more coordinated. They work large, global muscles while realy challenging core muscles such as the glute medius, upper glute maximus, adductors, multifidi, external obliques, and internal obliques.

Here is a quote from Gray Cook, the physical therapist/strength coach who really brought these movements to the forefront of the strength training industry:

Chopping and lifting can be used as corrective exercise, core conditioning, or generalized strengthening. Many use the chop and lift as a complete upper body program while others use it to complement the big pushing and pulling lifts. The moves are often hard to classify because they incorporate pushing and pulling. There is much more going on in a chop or lift than pushing and pulling though. Chopping and lifting is based on PNF patterns that are spiral and diagonal. When two hands are involved together in the same direction crossing the mid-line of the body in a downward or upward movement, it is called a chop or lift. -Gray Cook

There are many different ways to perform chops and lifts. Technically chops and lifts only include upward and downward diagonal patterns, but I feel like the pure rotational variations in the transverse plane have tremendous merit even though they arent multi -planar or true chops and lifts. Similarly, youre supposed to chop to the bottom knee or rear leg and lift to the upward knee or front leg (if using a half-kneeling or staggered inline stance), but rules were always made to be broken. Here are some ways to tinker with the exercises:

Stance

1. Tall Kneeling (On Both Knees) 2. Half Kneeling Front Leg Inside (On One Knee) 3. Half Kneeling Front Leg Outside (On One Knee) 4. Parallel Stance (Both Feet Parallel With Another in an Athletic Stance) 5. Inline Stance Front Leg Inside (One Leg in Front of the Other) 6. Inline Stance Front Leg Outside (One Leg in Front of the Other) 7. Single Leg (I Dont Like this Option)

Movement Angle

1. High to Low (Chop) 2. Low to High (Lift) 3. Straight Across (Rotation Press)

Stance Orientation

1. Facing Perpendicular to the Cable 2. Facing at a 45 Degree Angle Away from the Cable 3. Facing the Cable Column 4. Facing Away from the Cable Column

Handles/Implements

1. Dual Rope Handles (Rope Folded in Half) 2. Long Rope Handle 3. Core Bar attached to Cable (Nick Tumminellos ingenious invention seriously, check it out!) 4. Cook Bar attached to Cable (Gray Cooks bar) 5. JC Bands (Juan Carlos Santanas Bands) 6. Gray Cook Bands 7. Plate Loaded Core Bar (I like the cable version better for chops & lifts) 8. Medicine Balls (I like the dynamic method where you throw the ball, not where you hold onto it throughout the movements) 9. Towel (Looped Through Caribiner)

Rep Styles

1. Sequential Pull then Press Straight Out Without Crossing Midline of Body 2. Sequential Pull then Press While Crossing Midline of Body 3. Flowing Movement (My Favorite)

As you may know I used to teach high school mathematics. The way you figure out the number of total combinations possible is to multiply the number of combinations in each category together. So 7 x 3 x 4 x 9 x 3 = 2,268 different combinations of chop & lift movements!

Side Rant

Another thing I often find humorous in our industry is how ever trainer/coach who uploads Youtube videos demonstrates exercise form with super-light weight while looking like a robot. While I realize that this is often necessary to teach beginners proper form so they dont screw it up, strong people tend to use more weight and be less robot-looking with their form once they figure out the movement and learn where to move and where to stay tight. For this reason, I uploaded the following three videos to show how I perform chop and lift movements with substantial weight. As I said before, I like lifting heavy. I often hear how chops and lifts are precision-movements that shouldnt be loaded up heavy. I dont tend to listen to this advice, as I load everything up heavy! My form is not nearly as strict as what you often see online but Im using a lot of resistance and still controlling the weight. I prefer to perform the exercises this way as opposed to going really light and staying super-strict. Quid pro quo; everyone has their own preference.

Half Kneeling Cable Chop

Half Kneeling Cable Lift

Parallel Stance Cable Rotation

If you perform this workout, you might find yourself looking just like John Romaniello!

Hope you enjoyed the article!