all posts post new thread

Other/Mixed Physiological Adaptation Continuum

  • 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'm trying to organize some of the discussions and articles of HIIT and HIRT, A+A, Strong Endurance, MAF, etc. I'm trying to organize these training styles into a sort of continuum and the physiological adaptations that occur to better select the right tool for the job. I don't quite know where to start or the correct terminology but I'll take a stab at it using my layman terminology and see if it even makes sense to try and improve upon.

Slow Adaptation (Base)
LED or MAF (steady state): Expand the blood flow deeper into the muscles to oxygenate more tissue
Strength (<5 reps): Improve neurological connections to increase muscle force production
A+A (1:5, <10sec/~50sec work/rest ratio): Expand blood flow and improve neurological connections to increase muscle force production
Hypertrophy (5-15 reps): Increase muscle volume to hold more creatine/energy
HIRT (1:5, <30sec/~3-5min): Increase mitochondria density to produce more energy
Endurance (>15 reps): Improve resistance to acid
HIIT (1:<2, 20sec/40sec): Improve acid buffering​
Fast Adaptation (Peak)

Thoughts?
 
Also, where do other types of training fit in such as heavy singles every 30sec for 10min?
 
Am having a difficult time assigning these in a continuum. Realistically there is overlap on some of these, and one could manipulate further using clusters etc to get even more crossover/overlap effect. I like the idea of putting them in a context though, as it makes it easier to build a toolbox based on one's goals.

Some of the other training principles commonly used but outside SF training guidelines such as HIT. HIT adaptative response as traditionally defined would fall somewhere between the "Strength" and "Hypertrophy" zones. HIT as used in circuit/metcon form would fall between HIRT and HIIT, closer to HIIT.

Here's my take on it:


LED or MAF (steady state): Improve aerobic base, mitochondrial and capillary density. Improved enzymatic lipid recruitment for energy, and beneficial cardiac adaptive response unique to this method. Increased L Ventricle thickness with increase in stroke volume.


Strength (<5 reps with long rest periods 1:8): increase tendon density and thickness. Improve motor unit recruitment. Increase muscle size if supported by nutrition. Largest improvement in 1RM per training time.


A+A (1:5, <10sec/~50sec work/rest ratio): increase tendon density and thickness. Improve motor unit recruitment. Improve work capacity. Improve muscle memory. Increase muscle size if supported by nutrition. Good mix of increased 1RM and muscular endurance (generalization based on S&S).


Hypertrophy (5-15 reps): increased TUT, increase firing rate, increase muscle cross sectional thickness, sacrifice some limit strength training time to metabolically increase muscle growth. Can be used with variety of loading and rep ranges that make 1RM increases difficult to generalize relative to other strategies, typically less than higher RM work.

HIRT (1:5, <30sec/~3-5min): Increase work capacity, can be used to augment hypertrophy work and improve lactate clearance and pyruvate throughput.

Endurance (>15 reps): Unless taken to failure, results mostly in movement specific endurance increase with modest strength increase. Taken to or close to failure can be sub'd for higher %RM work for hypertrophic and strength gains using a trade off of increased training time and less enhanced limit strength.

HIIT (1:<2, 20sec/40sec): Time efficient method of increasing mitochondrial and capillary density. Also improves lactate clearance and pyruvate throughput. Limited ability to improve longer duration, steady state endurance. Increased L Ventricle thickness with increase in stroke pressure. Supports maintenance/improvement of max HR.
 
Pretty sure Josh Bryant callee these cluster sets and is a tool he uses for hypertrophy on his guys. Who are all freakishly big.
 
Sounds like the "Endurance" you guys are talking about is "strength endurance." Most endurance athletes would have something very different in mind.
I also think of strength endurance as repeated efforts of near max limit strength. I feel like "stamina" should replace one of these "endurance" definitions.
 
Am having a difficult time assigning these in a continuum. Realistically there is overlap...
The best continuum I could think of was how long it takes the adaptations to occur and similarly the duration of the effect. So many programs outside of strongfirst aim for quick results and similarly quick regression leading to unfruitful program hopping.
 
The best continuum I could think of was how long it takes the adaptations to occur and similarly the duration of the effect. So many programs outside of strongfirst aim for quick results and similarly quick regression leading to unfruitful program hopping.

In that case I'm still not sure how to assign them a spot in order.

Limit strength and hypertrophy would be the two longest in terms of solid gains, followed by aerobics. Pretty sure the mitochondrial and capillary response to HIIT won't be any less enduring than those gained by LSD. But increased stroke volume probably sticks around quite a bit longer than the increased stroke pressure. There is the unmentioned connective tissue remodeling in the feet and legs that happens with LSD and not HIIT, and this is also liable to stick around for a long time.

Conditioning endurance from HIT/circuit will probably be the most fleeting if one stops 100% for a length of time.

The better part of all of these can be induced to stick around with far less effort than it takes to build them up with perhaps exception of top end LSD endurance and 1RM strength.

I don't do programs so much as stick to some principles depending on what I'd like to improve. Many programs seem to me intended more to improve a specific single lift or two than make the whole machine better in some general sense. Nothing wrong with that but I am somewhat jaded re carryover from minimalist or skill specific methods. Is easier to apply broad principles like A&A, or HIT, and use them with whatever exercise selection and loading scheme is most applicable/available.

I think its important no matter what cycle or focus one is coming off of to cultivate the gains a bit and ID just what has been accomplished. Continue to maintain them a bit before jumping into something else if its important to the goal. If the adaptive response is lost quickly, it might be that whatever gains one made just weren't relevant.
 
Nice summary, @North Coast Miller.

Sounds like the "Endurance" you guys are talking about is "strength endurance." Most endurance athletes would have something very different in mind.
Yes, we do.

There are some different intensities between HIIT and MAF, such as VO2 Max, LT, and tempo. These differentiate aspects of the aerobic system in a way similar to the strength focused scheme being discussed here.

It’s true that it’s all a continuum and the body doesn’t see clear categories, but for the minds sake and training purposes, these categories are useful.
 
In that case I'm still not sure how to assign them a spot in order
Perhaps there is a relationship with the steepness and length of the asymptote of progress. LED might see considerable improvements for very long times vs HIIT might see significant improvement for a few weeks and then see a significant plateau for a long time.
 
Yes, we do.

There are some different intensities between HIIT and MAF, such as VO2 Max, LT, and tempo. These differentiate aspects of the aerobic system in a way similar to the strength focused scheme being discussed here.

It’s true that it’s all a continuum and the body doesn’t see clear categories, but for the minds sake and training purposes, these categories are useful.


I appreciate the distinction between, but I'm thinking that all the other attributes fall within the ones listed. That is to say you would train for them using some combination of the basics.

You would train for VO2 max and LT using some combination of HIIT, HIT tempo work and LSD, at least from my POV - but that isn't really my wheelhouse. For the purposes of this thought experiment, I'd say you should add any other broad categories you can think of that aren't represented.
 
Perhaps there is a relationship with the steepness and length of the asymptote of progress. LED might see considerable improvements for very long times vs HIIT might see significant improvement for a few weeks and then see a significant plateau for a long time.


I like the visual, but I'm not sure could assign all of these attributes to a scale of that sort. Or at least you'd have to maybe assign them based on how rapidly they are effected by detraining vs how long it takes to acquire.

For purposes of training goals it would be maybe more helpful to simply rank the typical adaptive response and how long it takes on average to see significant changes. Again...this is going to vary considerably by strategy (A&A strength/size increase vs HIT for example), so you'd have to add another rank based on intangibles like dropout/compliance rate, which is maybe closer to your original intent.

Or maybe I'm zinging off into the tall grass at this point :confused:...
 
I appreciate the distinction between, but I'm thinking that all the other attributes fall within the ones listed. That is to say you would train for them using some combination of the basics.

You would train for VO2 max and LT using some combination of HIIT, HIT tempo work and LSD, at least from my POV - but that isn't really my wheelhouse. For the purposes of this thought experiment, I'd say you should add any other broad categories you can think of that aren't represented.
Endurance athletes will sometimes train strength and power with short sprints of 10-20 sec all out and complete recoveries.

But far more common are intervals in between those and long steady state effort. The nomenclature can be confusing, but the different names refer to a couple of commonalities.

VO2MAX Intervals, or 3-5 min at VO2MAX pace, which is a set hard as you can maintain for 5 min. 1:1 work to rest ratio.

LT intervals, or long intervals of 8-20 min at LT pace, which is a set hard as you can go for 30-60 min. 4:1 work rest ratio.

I didn’t see anything in the OP that reflects this sort of endurance training.
 
I didn't think to specify those styles of training; I suppose I would have lumped those into the HIIT category above if I had. I imagine I didn't consider them because I see them unique to endurance training and I wouldn't think to perform them with a kettlebell swing for example which is a little short sighted considering Girevoy Sport training for example. What adaptations are going on with the body for those training methods?
 
Also... from an endurance perspective
(I believe these are sometimes referred to as Power Endurance training.)

Speed Strength Intervals:
Above anaerobic threshold for short periods, and long rest periods to minimize lactic acid build up.
  • 1min at 107% AT 1:4 work/rest, 5 sets

High Intensity Endurance Training:
They teach you how to sense when you are nearing your anaerobic threshold. Training to maintain a workload close to but not exceeding it.
  • 10-15min at 98% AT 1:1 work/rest 3-4 sets, or
  • 60-120min at 98% AT
 
Endurance athletes will sometimes train strength and power with short sprints of 10-20 sec all out and complete recoveries.

But far more common are intervals in between those and long steady state effort. The nomenclature can be confusing, but the different names refer to a couple of commonalities.

VO2MAX Intervals, or 3-5 min at VO2MAX pace, which is a set hard as you can maintain for 5 min. 1:1 work to rest ratio.

LT intervals, or long intervals of 8-20 min at LT pace, which is a set hard as you can go for 30-60 min. 4:1 work rest ratio.

I didn’t see anything in the OP that reflects this sort of endurance training.


These are good to have spec'd out, along with @offwidth description.

I'm still sort of the opinion that these training modes fall under HIIT, HIRT, or HIT as used in metcon or circuit, with the biggest difference being work to rest and what % of full recovery between attempts. Though...the same could be said about the difference between limit strength, hypertrophy, A&A etc.

I think we need a whole other category for this sort of endurance and power training :).
 
I only added those categories because the OP included MAF endurance in a list that was otherwise focused on strength.

VO2MAX training generally shows up in the heart, increasing how much blood can be pumped. LT and tempo work is based on lactate, training the body to become more efficient at higher lactate levels.

As far as I’m concerned, those intensities are really only relevant to folks with a performance goal, usually racing. The type of race or performance objective determines what kind of interval training is best.

For general health and fitness, I think MAF aerobic work combined with Easy Strength like strength work is best for most people, most of the time.
 
As far as I’m concerned, those intensities are really only relevant to folks with a performance goal, usually racing. The type of race or performance objective determines what kind of interval training is best.

Yes!
 
To recap my understanding of where we're at, I umderstand these adaptations to be made:
  1. Increase capilary density
  2. Increase connective tissue density
  3. Increase motor unit recruitment
  4. Increase heart stroke volume
  5. Increase heart stroke pressure
  6. Reduce lactate buildup
  7. Increase lactate throughput
  8. Increase lactate resistance
  9. Increase mitochondrial density
  10. Increase muscle cell volume
Can different training styles be ranked according to their effectiveness at creating these adaptations?

Also do the adaptations need to come in a specific order similar to periodization of hypertrophy, strength, power to create muscle, make it strong, then make it fast?
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom