Jason / Mark / Others,
A couple of points here:
- in my opinion, our langauge and word choice is probably not only confusing novices, but experienced folks alike. Providing advice such as, "work up to", and, "start compressing rest periods", may be the source of some inividuals using protocol inccorectly. I'm not picking on anyone here, just using these latest examples of what I think some of the problem is with certain language... there are plenty of others throughout the forum, including my own former "mistakes".
- Pavel and I have been discussing the idea of who the responsibility falls w/r to comprehension... the reader, or the writer (or speaker). Sure, both, to some extent; but the writing can always be improved... so, what is the proper descriptive language for this idea of increasing density, "passively"?
- the idea of "actively compressing rest periods" that is spawned from this language is maybe what gets folks into trouble. If we are framed in a fitness society that is already entrenched in, "do more, do harder, kill yourself in every outing", then the "work to up to less rest", night be understand as, "actively seek to do more work next time out".
- the observations I am seeing are, "let the rest periods reduce on their own"... "passively" increase density, not "actively". This is not a subtle difference. Moreover, "go when you feel ready again" does not track with HR metrics, for many (save for the former endurance junkie)... so we may want to say something like, "go when you feel ready again, + :30", or something of that nature. More rest is better then less.
- so, to passively increase your density (reduce the duration of your rest periods), go again after ~30sec of your feeling ready, each and every time you approach the bell. If you happen to run a clock (because the clock is not at all necessary), you will notice your rest periods decreasing "on their own" as your aerobic fitness responds to the stimulus and improves. Yes... "aerobic fitness" (I know it sounds like blasphamy ;] ). (One might also suggest here, "alactic fitness", though I'm not sure this term describes the importance of developing the aerobic system.)
- Conversely, if you are actively trying to reduce your rest periods, you will likely be using anaerobic fueling completely, and avoid aerobic fueling (through recovery) altogether. Expect a wall on your progress and/or a low ceiling on your overall performance level (yes, even if you are "elite").
- Lastly, there seems to be no linear progression to the goal (in terms of S&S) of 100 swings @ 5min. In other words, you don't progress by say starting out at say, 90 sec rest between sets of swings, then "passively" reducing to 75s, then 60, then 45, then 30, then test... for an easy to understand example.
- What seems to happen is that as the aerobic system gets stronger, you may find your rest periods compress to a certain point, say 40-50s or so, and stays there for a week or two (remember passive rest reduction). The beauty of nature is that she saves anaerobic glycolysis whether training it or not (anecdotally). So, go ahead and leap off that bigger aerobic tank you created and test out... now, is the ONLY time you actively shrink the rest periods: for the goal. You might surprise yourself. If you succeed, and increase the bell size, guess what... your rest, dictated once again by, "go again 30s after you feel ready" will likely increase your rest periods to over a minute. You're doing it right, don't fret.
- do not confuse training recommendations with competition recommendations
Sorry for the long diabtribe... thoughts?