MacFhearchair's off-season anti-slack

[MacFhearchair]

My understanding was that lifting to failure (causing micro-tearing in the muscle) was the way to get the body to most efficiently build strong enough muscles to do the job next time - by forcing attention and repair jobs on the muscles targeted by the exercise (and then the next highest weight will cause failure and so on). So far that strategy has been working well enough and I've been making a lot of progress really fast, with week-long breaks here and there. Is there a reason I shouldn't do it this way?

Remember I'm a life-science nerd. If you can put it in data-supported, physiological terms, I'm more likely to see things your way and change my habits (or at least give it a whirl).

Background on how I do it:

I start with a weight I know I can do, and I do a set of 5. If I succeed, I go up in whatever increment seems logical. So for a squat day, I'll start at 135, go to 155, if I do all 5 at 155 and then at 175, I'll try something heavier like 185, and I can't touch anything heavier than that until I can get all 5 @ 185 (but I might mix up the previous stuff, like starting at 145, going to 165, and then trying 185 now that I know 185 is my max). ... so I'm pressing to failure in every session.

With things that involve weaker muscle groups like bench presses, i go up in smaller increments, obvs.

[Alan H]

You're absolutely right about the micro-tearing and subsequent inflammation response rebuilding muscle. The tearing is caused by some number of the actin/myosin cross-bridges not releasing, if I remember rightly...and it's linked to ATP depletion within the muscle. My understanding is that you get about the optimal level of micro-damage at 70-80% of max. Lifting to failure results in significantly more damage.

It's fine to do that once in a while, like every other week or something....because you can fix that damage, obviously, and you will "rebuild" a notch stronger than you started as long as you rest and nosh on oodles of protein, thereby getting all of those nifty amino acids. The problem comes when you lift to failure and do damage that doesn't all get repaired each time. Then there's a cumulative effect of damage where 95% of it gets all fixed up in the next 24-36 hours, but that last 5% doesn't. Repeat that week in and week out and you develop a problem!

There's a school of thought which is particularly applicable to throwers, which suggests that lifting to failure is pointless because we never throw to failure. After all, you're only going to throw that 28 pound weight three times, with five minutes breaks in between each throw unless you win your class, in which case you could opt for three more throws with two minute breaks in between. None of these even come close to approximating a muscle failure mode. If you never throw to failure, then why lift to failure?

There's a tool out there called a Power Factor, which costs a mint, but what it does is attach a string to the weight or the bar that you're lifting. You velcro it to something on the ground, like the rack or another weight. Now you lift and the power factor senses how fast you're moving the bar. You enter the weight you're lifting into the thing and it spits out how many watts you just generated and the speed of the bar. John Gallagher is a big proponent of this....you'll find him if you google him.

His thought is, that as a thrower, you don't need to move some 300-pound thing slowly, you are moving a 14 or 28 pound thing, FAST. So don't lift for the maximum weight, lift for the maximum POWER generated.....meaning watts. The truth is, functionally speaking...proved over and over, that if you do this, your will flat-out get stronger in your 1-rep and 3-rep maxes.

So why don't I buy a Power Factor and just train that way? Well, maybe I ought to! . .. but years and years of throwers doing traditional weight training suggests that a "Heavy weights phase" where you grind up more weight, more slowly than you need, is combined with a phase where you lift much lighter weight, quickly, and that gets optimal results.

Which is correct? Hell if I know. I don't think that anybody knows, and it's probably different for different people. That's why really good coaches are worth their weight in gold.

[Alan H]

Regarding the nerdy scientific approach to training to failure, and the pro's and cons from a neuromuscular standpoint, this science nerd recommends to his fellow science nerd that she read this:

http://www.weightrainer.net/training/failure.html

and she might follow some of the internal links within that article, as well.

I read this a while ago...last year sometime if I remember rightly and it was helpful.

[MacFhearchair]

What you said actually makes a lot of sense, and it might explain why I reach really awesome new PRs after a week of rest and then slowly tick back down again during subsequent sessions until I get another big break. It might also explain why I've been eating like a pig and not really gaining any weight.

Thanks for the resources. Time for some homework.

I also like this wattage idea, although if I remember my physics correctly, one can make these calculations roughly as well as some expensive device just by taking video and having someone estimate distances. ...that is if you don't mind a little bit of math (you probably don't even need calculus). I like to think of it as weightlifting for the brain.

[Alan H]

If you spend a bunch of time reading online, you'll find varying opinions on this issue. The problem is that most of the discussion is by either bodybuilders, who are aiming for as much mass as possible, or powerlifters, who are aiming for as much slow grunt strength as possible. It doesn't matter to a powerlifter how long it takes to lift that 650 pound deadlift off the floor, it just has to come off the floor. On the other hand, a bodybuilder doesn't care if he/she can deadlift 100 pounds, just as long as the associated muscles are huge and they have a low enough body fat amount that the muscle definition is absolute.

We are neither of those things...not powerlifters nor bodybuilders.

That said, there certainly is some truth to the idea that if you can only pick up 150 pounds, then it's going to be a lot harder for you to heave a 28 pound weight over your head than it will be for someone who can pick up 250 pounds. It might also be noted that one of the strongest women in the world, Kristy Litwinski, is ranked #3 in the world among Highland Games women. She's an OK thrower, but she's so phenomenally strong that her something-like-average technique is overcome by brute force and the implements just fly.

At the same time, after years of squatting, Adriane can no longer back squat...she's gotta do it with a waist belt, standing above a pit, or on boxes with the weights down by her ankles. Yet, she'll probably be the World Champ again.

So where's the truth of it, for the average guy or gal?

I don't know. I know this, though....that probably a method which uses a little bit of everything, will get you (me) there, sooner or later. There's more than one path to the goal of making the weights and hammers go far. For example, if you were following Matt Vincents program, you'd be doing nothing like what you're doing now...not even close. If you were doing what Dan McKim does, ditto, and you'd never deadlift. Matt's program and Dan's program are TOTALLY different, and they're both wildly different from Sean Betz's general idea of "complexes", which is basically what Mike P. does. Matt Vincent, Dan McKim and Sean Betz are all world champions....Matt in 2012, Dan in 2011 and 2010, Sean in 2009.

Beth Burton doesn't lift at all, you saw that. Now you know the outrageous lifting regime that Kristy follows. Now, over at FB, you know what Adriane is doing. All different.

So I'd say, if you want to lift to concentric failure, then do it. Just don't do it EVERY time, unless you have a lot of rest between lifting sessions, like two days. I'd also tell someone who *never* lifted to failure that maybe they should try it now and then, because it will certainly stimulate muscle repair.

Once upon a time Myles Wetzel ...a freaking LEGEND at this sport in the South....told me something. He said "Find what works for you, and do it.". If you are convinced that lifting to concentric muscle failure at every workout is working for you, then go for it. ....Well, go for it at least during the "strength phase" of the offseason! Once we transition to moving stuff *fast*, then there's pretty much no question about it. NOBODY cleans and snatches to muscle failure.

[Alan H]

What you said actually makes a lot of sense, and it might explain why I reach really awesome new PRs after a week of rest and then slowly tick back down again during subsequent sessions until I get another big break. It might also explain why I've been eating like a pig and not really gaining any weight.

Thanks for the resources. Time for some homework.

I also like this wattage idea, although if I remember my physics correctly, one can make these calculations roughly as well as some expensive device just by taking video and having someone estimate distances. ...that is if you don't mind a little bit of math (you probably don't even need calculus). I like to think of it as weightlifting for the brain.

Exactly.

And yeah, you can probably do estimates with video. Now that I think about it, the super expensive gizmo is called the Tendo unit...which is different from the Tendo instrument which electrically simulates muscles. The Power Factor is less expensive, maybe <$200.

Me? I'm cheap and I don't want to spend the money for a Power Factor. I figure that hang cleaning my absolute max is kinda fun, but rather useless when it comes to generating maximum power. I mean, the weight is big but I can't move it very fast. Where's the optimal range of weight/speed? Probably around 70% of my max. So in about 3-4 weeks I won't be hang cleaning no 195 pounds loads, no way no how....back down to 3 x 4 x 165-170 at the top end, for me.

Old skool. It worked for Brian Oldfield and Al Oerter and John Godina and Ryan Vierra, I bet it'll work for me.

[o1d_dude]

It's simple. Not easy but simple.

Lifting does not build strength. It's the recovery that follows the lifting that builds strength.

[MacFhearchair]

Today I mixed it up a little and did some climbing instead of lifting. I did five routes including some overhang, some simple verts, and a chimney (all balance and technique). Overhang sucks because I've not been climbing consistently and my forearms aren't strong enough to hang, so to speak. Chimney is awesome because I'm flexible, stronger than ever, and I've got decent balance, and there's very little hand-hooking in balance-based climbs (so who cares that my forearms are wussy).

I wandered over to the lifting area afterwards; a complete joke. The place is swarmed. I couldn;t even find 10 square feet of available space to set up a rack or do some deadlifts. Effing January! Go home noobs!

Aaanyway. 10 minutes in the sauna and my mood was vastly improved. Now I'm starving and zzz.

[MacFhearchair]

Yoga today; 75 min. I get massive foot cramps during yoga, snowboarding, and sometimes climbing. IDK what's wrong with my feet, but it suuucks.

Other than that, it was a pretty good day. Scheduled to lift tomorrow. Woo.

[MacFhearchair]

Tonight squats felt alright, but I wore the World's Stupidest Shoes and things started going haywire as I got near to the top - I'm hoping it was just the shoes. I did 3 @ 175 and that was that for me. :/

I pumped two dumbbell bench presses with 50lb in each hand, working up to that in 5 lb increments from 35lb. It felt good, and two is better than the one I got last time, so there's that.

I went to get on the pullup assist machine and my knee just gave out from under me; no pain or anything, it just failed. That's funny, I thought, and went about my business. Then I tried a mock WOB with a 25lb kettle bell and the pain in that knee damn near knocked me over. It has since recovered - it was more like a bad twist than any kind of real injury, but I decided to give it a rest after that. I went and did some careful bouldering to finish up the night.

I might need a break.