all posts post new thread

Other/Mixed Strength or Speed?

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.)

Imran Chaudhary

First Post
Does anyone have any opinions on the training methodologies of the Marinovitch's or Nick Curson? I've been following some of the MMA fighters and boxers Nick Curson trains and I'm interested in his methods. The thing is, his ideas seem to be quite contrary to what I've been doing for a while, namely low rep kettle bells and body weight training as per Pavels' books.

Both schools of thought seem to be based on solid sports science, but Curson argues that developing maximum strength is not beneficial to most sports, and that research on this is often misunderstood. Here is a link to an article on his site: The Science

I'm not trying to be antagonistic to anyone here. I've been a big fan of Pavel's work for some time. I'd be interested in the opinions of some experienced heads, particularly those that have worked with athletes.
 
From that article:

"Despite popular belief, conventional heavy weightlifting which focus primarily on developing muscle hypertrophy, is not a comprehensive means of developing better athletes."

As with the article we were discussing the other day, there are many assumption in here that aren't necessarily valid or are too simple.

Conventional weight lifting does not focus primarily on developing muscle hypertrophy it focuses on both skill and muscle hypertrophy. Weight lifting at StrongFirst tends for focus less on hypertrophy and more on skill than is "conventional."

Muscle hypertrophy is, without a doubt, beneficial in some circumstances, but that it's beneficial doesn't mean it's looked at as a "comprehensive means of developing better athletes," just that it's one component of that - for some people, in some sports, at some times.

There is no such thing as a single program that's a comprehensive means of developing better athletes. We take what I believe to be a more nuanced, and an appropriately nuanced, approach to program design. Our most popular program, S & S, is designed to improve general physical preparedness in a wide variety of populations, and to be scaled back for those who need more time for and more focus on sport-specific training. It develops mobility, supporting strength, overhead strength, explosive power that can be used repeatedly with very little degradation in performance, and other attributes that are beneficial to a wide variety of populations.

S&S prescribes 2000+ swings per month - if you've been doing that, you haven't been been doing low-rep training by most definitions.

Strength is a foundational physical attribute. S&S isn't sport-specific, and general strength isn't sport-specific.

So, I don't know quite get what the fuss is about.

-S-
 
Thanks for your reply.

I take your point that talking in general terms about 'sports' and 'athletes' is not particularly useful.

Personally my interest is in striking martial arts and how low rep strength work may benefit someone who takes part in these sports. (Plus I just enjoy strength training.)

I'm not actually doing many swings myself, I tend to do ROP plus deadlifts and pistols a couple of times per week. Lately I've been swapping C&P for hand stands. All slow or isometric moves. It's a small sample size but I've always felt this type of training has improved speed and power.

I noticed the paragraph you quoted and the assumption that strength work focusses on hypertrophy. However it was the following section that prompted my question:

"Science has proven many times that the use of heavy training loads and slow resistance movements diminishes the speed-strength qualities of athletes as well as inhibits the the ability to perform complex motor tasks usually during the most technical phases of sports movements. These are conflicting ideas to think that training for absolute or maximal strength will improve speed as the two are different motor tasks."

It seems to contradict what I've read in the past. I'd be interested in any thoughts on this point.
 
haven't read these articles, but based on the quotes I don't think I'd find them interesting. What is your question as it applies to you? Are you looking for a type of training? I think you'd find a lot of good reading in the StrongFirst blog. There are several good articles about training MMA fighters and methodologies.
 
I noticed the article they reference in your link relies heavily on Dr Verkhoshansky's work. If you haven't read it, Pavel and Dan John address these issues thoroughly in Easy Strength, referencing Dr Verkhoshansky's work as well, particularly in the plyometrics section. If I recall correctly, in short, they note that a solid strength foundation is essential, but beyond a certain point the strength training becomes so domain specific that it may interfere with athletic activity in general, especially when rapid contraction/relaxation cycles are required. The "point" at which returns diminish seemed to be somewhat arbitrary, but was reflected in Dan John's "standards". I recall they do state that Verkoshansky recommended a solid base of strength training before pursuing advanced plyometrics (I believe 1.5x bodyweight squat), but that prior to advanced plyometrics simple jump rope for speed, broad jumps, and vertical jumps can be trained.

Your concern about speed vs strength is definitely reflected in the book...that instead of following a powerlifting routine, for instance, build your strength through strength/skill practice that is recoverable and allows one to focus more on one's sport. With your interest in striking sports, there is a section on how a fighting coach (Bacardi? I believe...he may have been a boxing coach) incorporates easy strength type programming into his fighters strength training. There was also a section on a sprint coach (Ben Johnson's, I believe), with a similar strategy. Far from being a "strength vs speed" question, it is framed as a "strength for speed" principle...entirely consistent with the principle of strength as a foundational quality.
 
Matts said:
haven't read these articles, but based on the quotes I don't think I'd find them interesting. What is your question as it applies to you? Are you looking for a type of training? I think you'd find a lot of good reading in the StrongFirst blog. There are several good articles about training MMA fighters and methodologies.
Click to expand...
I'm interested in supplementary training for martial arts. I'll have a dig into the blog and see what I find. Thanks.
 
Bryant W said:
I noticed the article they reference in your link relies heavily on Dr Verkhoshansky's work. If you haven't read it, Pavel and Dan John address these issues thoroughly in Easy Strength, referencing Dr Verkhoshansky's work as well, particularly in the plyometrics section. If I recall correctly, in short, they note that a solid strength foundation is essential, but beyond a certain point the strength training becomes so domain specific that it may interfere with athletic activity in general, especially when rapid contraction/relaxation cycles are required. The "point" at which returns diminish seemed to be somewhat arbitrary, but was reflected in Dan John's "standards". I recall they do state that Verkoshansky recommended a solid base of strength training before pursuing advanced plyometrics (I believe 1.5x bodyweight squat), but that prior to advanced plyometrics simple jump rope for speed, broad jumps, and vertical jumps can be trained.

Your concern about speed vs strength is definitely reflected in the book...that instead of following a powerlifting routine, for instance, build your strength through strength/skill practice that is recoverable and allows one to focus more on one's sport. With your interest in striking sports, there is a section on how a fighting coach (Bacardi? I believe...he may have been a boxing coach) incorporates easy strength type programming into his fighters strength training. There was also a section on a sprint coach (Ben Johnson's, I believe), with a similar strategy. Far from being a "strength vs speed" question, it is framed as a "strength for speed" principle...entirely consistent with the principle of strength as a foundational quality.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your response. I haven't read Easy Stength, though it's been on my list for a while. Will have to purchase it. I think I have read about the sprint coach (Barry Ross?) in The Four Hour Body.
 
Pavel's kettlebell training isn't just low rep stuff. The swings in particular let alone snatches are high rep moves. Swings are precisely 50% of the key SF programme "S&S". S&S does wonders for my judo and kendo. Kendo is a striking art.
 
Imran Chaudhary said:
"Science has proven many times that the use of heavy training loads and slow resistance movements diminishes the speed-strength qualities of athletes as well as inhibits the the ability to perform complex motor tasks usually during the most technical phases of sports movements. These are conflicting ideas to think that training for absolute or maximal strength will improve speed as the two are different motor tasks."

It seems to contradict what I've read in the past. I'd be interested in any thoughts on this point.
Click to expand...
What @Bryant W said - again, context matters here. If you have a double bodyweight deadlift, you don't need to be stronger for many sports, and getting stronger could have an adverse impact on your sports performance. But not nearly enough athletes have a double bodyweight deadlift. Let us note that a double bodyweight deadlift is not a "heavy training load" - it's about an 80% lift for me and I'm old and skinny. :) Nor it is required to deadlift slowly.

The Easy Strength book does cover this - perhaps someone could quote a paragraph or two from it here?

The take-away for you should be that what the author says will be true for some athletes some of the time and only that, and the lower a person's athletic level in general, the less appropriate the author's advice will be. Note also that this isn't the first time these sentiments from this author have appeared - I believe you'll find an earlier instance referenced at the bottom.

-S-
 
I think @Steve Freides post cover it well.

To add some more geeky info...

Speed-strength sports (and striking is to some extent speed-strength) are actually acceleration-based and not speed-based. It's not about the maximal speed you can produce, but how much you can develop in a very short time. The physical quality responsible is rate-of-force-development which is (somewhat simplified) max strength divided by the time it took to develop it. If your max strength is too low than even if you develop it in an extremely short time, you still end up with small impact (to further geek it up is the integration of force over time).

Easy Strength is a great source for that, and as mentioned by @Bryant W gives examples of both fighting and sprinting coaches. If your up for a deep reading Siff and Verkoshansky's Supertraining covers that over around 100+ pages.

Back to the beginning, get strong enough for your sport, really no need to go further... To follow Dan John's "guidelines", if your deadlift is under 1.5BW improve it, if it's 2-2.5BW (depending on sport) strength is not your problem.
 
Hello,

S&S, or at least reaching Simple standard lead me to 2X bdw deadlift, regardless other physical activities

Kind regards,

Pet'
 
UFC fighter Matt Brown does his S&C work out of Westside Barbell which trains their Lifters and athletes to be both strong and fast using max effort and dynamic effort days. You can use these methods for martial arts. Heavy deads and KB presses on max effort days and KB swings, cleans, snatches and more presses on dynamic days using 12-15 sets of 2-3 reps done with explosion. It goes without saying that the swings, snatches and cleans are explosive, add the same principals to your presses.
 
^ This +1

Your program needs to hit multiple aspects, just not all on the same day. And leave enough in the tank for a ton of mat/ring work.

An amateur might do very well working mostly with a power lifting protocol and leave the speed and conditioning for the ring/mat/heavybag engaging in the actual business. Work some isometrics on the velocity days. It all depends on how much time you have for training, not everyone has time to train like the pros.
 
This is a direct quote from the book Bruce Lee: The Art of Expressing the Human Body by John Little.
A great book, lots of Lee's training ideas. I fortunately picked up a brand new copy in a charity shop. I don't do martial arts now but used to years ago. .....

Velocity-The Forgotten Factor in Strength Development

As well as progressing in weight and repetitions, Lee believed that velocity could also be quantifiable as a calculated progression. An increase in speed - speed of movement and speed of recovery - he reasoned, should be a planned part of the training scheme of any serious martial
artist. To this end, Lee found it beneficial to occasionally ignore adding repetitions or weight, and concentrate instead on working to reduce the overall performance time of his workout. Lee would carefully time his workouts, striving to execute each repetition as quickly as possible. The
recovery period between muscle groups was also timed and, if increased stamina was one of his
goals during a particular workout, an effort would be made to reduce the length of his recovery periods between sets.
In attempting speed training for yourself, you'll find that you will not be able to handle quite so much weight as you would if the exercises were performed in the normal way, but the
weight should be heavy enough to make the last few repetitions of the last set a distinct effort.
Like Lee, you should set yourself a target time and not alter your exercise poundage or repetitions until this target is reached.

.....from the man.

I did escrima - my coach was coached by Dan Inosanto - I vaguely remember in the piles of sweat and excruciating S&C training I once did that he would time out bodyweight sessions. We did a basic bodyweight strength before bag work. Pull ups, push ups, duck walks, speed ball kind of thing with rests periods decided upon the speed of which the other trainee could finish their set. So a set of 10 pull ups done strict ended up as 10 explosive and over time little or no rest between stations. I would be hospitalised now. Good luck, enjoy the punishment.
 
Steve Freides said:
There is no such thing as a single program that's a comprehensive means of developing better athletes.
Click to expand...
StrongFirst methods are pretty darn close...

Imran Chaudhary said:
Personally my interest is in striking martial arts and how low rep strength work may benefit someone who takes part in these sports.
Click to expand...
Shahaf Levin said:
Speed-strength sports (and striking is to some extent speed-strength) are actually acceleration-based and not speed-based.
Click to expand...
+1

The only reason a weight should move slowly is because it's really heavy. (F)orce = (M)a#@ x (A)cceleration. The force put into the rep should be the same regardless of the weight for strength training, the object just moves at different velocities.

A cat can jump so high because they are able to recruit nearly 100% of their muscle contraction potential instantly. Humans on the other hand take about 30 seconds. Unfortunately, some muscle tissues are already fatigued before others begin to contract. Elite weightlifters or powerlifters are able to recruit a much higher percentage of muscle fiber in a shorter period of time.

Strength training aims to engage muscle fiber faster before other muscle fiber starts to fatigue. Hypertrophy training intentionally wants to fatigue more muscle which needs to be done slower. Teaching the body to rapidly engage muscle tissue is pretty universally beneficial to all sports and can be done moving the bar at any pace as long as the mass is inversely related and the force applied remains constant.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Too much low rep work will definitely slow one down on average. What constitutes too much is debatable. If you are training to peak is also going to change perspective vs training to be ready for an amateur bout at short notice.

Striking is highly technique driven, not strength driven. There's a place for it but it shouldn't be the focus unless one needs to gain weight. You'll be better off with a higher percentage of lower load higher rep, and that as a supplemental for conditioning, not hypertrophy. Any strength gains from low rep work will be better tailored to working the clinch over punching.

This recommendation would change for MMA where grappeling comes into play and you accept a certain loss of hand speed to improve your ground game or clinch. Every change in MA tradition or sort will have consequences for how one should train, not to mention starting bodyweight and build.

Added muscle mass is nice as it is added mass, but most of the power for a punch comes from body mechanics and relaxation of the antagonist muscles (and agonist for a little bit of the ROM).
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom