all posts post new thread

Other/Mixed Burden of Constant Fitness

  • Thread starter Deleted member 5559
  • Start date
Other strength modalities (e.g., Clubs), mixed strength modalities (e.g., combined kettlebell and barbell), other goals (flexibility)
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)

Deleted member 5559

Guest
I saw something written by Rob Shaul a while back discussing the burden of constant fitness. I believe it's common place to peak pretty infrequently but in some cases, peaking is not desirable at all. Considering something like the park bench and bus bench analogies, some methods are decent at blending the two to reduce periodization and peaking - I don't know what kind of bench that is.

Some other threads discussing Westside and another about endurance training got me curious what level of fitness can be indefinitely improved and what timeframe should we expect to see improvement and at what magnitude? 2% every month, 5% each year, less, more?

Don't have a specific direction of the thread but we'll see where it goes.
 
The concept of 'peaking' for competition performance is not universally accepted and many sports people aim to walk around in competition level condition with maybe just some quiet days and a good night's sleep before competing. Michael Phelps, Roger Federer and Bernard Hopkins are examples of this. I imagine it takes great discipline
 
Tiger said:
That is a park bench program?
Click to expand...
I see what you mean but I think of park bench as a level of performance a little below what I'm thinking. The power grid is operated at limit with a reliability margin built in for safety and I see park bench kind of like that, with a reliability margin. The bus bench I see as kind of an equipment capacity limit. Maybe that's more of an express bus. I realize I'm adding an unnecessary semantic component but without it, there's less to discuss I suppose.
 
Bro Mo said:
I see what you mean but I think of park bench as a level of performance a little below what I'm thinking. The power grid is operated at limit with a reliability margin built in for safety and I see park bench kind of like that, with a reliability margin. The bus bench I see as kind of an equipment capacity limit. Maybe that's more of an express bus. I realize I'm adding an unnecessary semantic component but without it, there's less to discuss I suppose.
Click to expand...

I like that POV. Maintaining a constant state strongly implies a margin of capacity between your daily and what you could do if you leaned into some specific aspect a little harder.
 
Interesting topic.

In my experience, training is non-linear in nature. I have natural peaks and natural valleys, with a general trendline (hopefully going upwards).

To me, the bus bench is an useful tool to push the limits and then pull back, but not necessarily related with peaking for an event.

I have little doubts about the cyclical nature of training: push harder, pull back (plateau for a while if desired), repeat. Bus bench works well for pushing harder. About peaking for a meet, I dont know a thing about it.

For rate of progress, I only have experience with kettlebells at beginner level. I'd say that improving 4 kg/year at the beginning, and then 2 kg per year during the intermediate phase are good rates of progress. This would mean, for instance, improving the Simple time standard from 24 to 32 in 2 years, then improving the snatch test from 20 to 24 kg in 1 year. These are more or less the rates I improved at.
 
I call it park bench with a view of the bus stop. Typical park bench training, but a little event specific stuff thrown in here and there. In endurance sports, these are "B" and "C" races. Races for fun, to test things out, but not overly concerned with results. No real taper, just a little rest before and after, then back to the park bench.

Sounds like Easy Strength thinking to me. Raise the floor, don't worry about peaking the roof.
 
vegpedlr said:
Sounds like Easy Strength thinking to me. Raise the floor, don't worry about peaking the roof.
Click to expand...
This got me thinking about different progressions. Easy strength only having a single progression conceptually, makes it almost a reverse linear periodization. 2x5 @ 80% will eventually be 2x5@79% making it easier before it gets harder when weight is added.

A triple progression like Soju and Tuba is a little more on the performance edge perhaps?
 
I found Easy Strength to offer a great way to maintain a high level of strength at all times. The latest DJ iteration is not purely 2x5, it shakes it up a little with some variation: 2x5, 2x5, 5-3-2, 2x5, 1x6, 10x1, 2x5 or something like that.

Isn't Plan Strong as well some of the Russian plans based on lots of variation with some sets often approaching your max in order to keep you near your peak?
 
Those who want everyday fitness have different needs from those who need to peak for specific athletic events. Everyday fitness workouts are similar to how Pavel T described good kettlebell workouts: they give more to you than they take away from you. In contrast, peaking for specific athletic events is often different because the events can take away more from you than they give to you.
 
I work out 6 days a week, plus my job is physical. I've learned I need a week off every few weeks. I've started 50/20 again, but I'm also running 3 days a week and learning pistol squats and one arm pushups on top of this.. But this time, I'm not pushing for reps, i'm letting them come natural. Plus i'm going some grip strength training 3 days a week.
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom