Variation is probably the most misunderstood principle of training.
There are a variety of commercialized training methods that promote
constant variation to keep your body guessing. While this is true in
principal, too much variation in training leads to mediocre results. To
compound the problem, the amount of variation of these training methods
doesn’t fit the training level of the athlete.
The first misconception with variation is that you need to change the
lifts you are doing from workout to workout or week to week. Variation
should be achieved through changes in set and rep schemes and the weight
lifted in relation to the athlete’s 1 repetition max. This does not
mean change set and rep schemes so often that you are not maximizing the
results from training one fitness parameter. The best way to achieve
variation for most athletes is to change the weight lifted week to week.
An anecdotal example is that competitive weightlifters use the same
lifts multiple times a week and sometimes in the same day. These
individuals constantly make physiological adaptations and enhance
performance. The Olympic lifts these athletes train with are proven to
greatly enhance vertical jump height, sprint speed, cutting ability, and
reduce injuries. The point is that much less variation produces
superior results than commercialized training methods and those that
some trainers promote to increase athletic performance.
A recent form of variation that has become popular is daily
undulating periodization. The fitness focus each day of the week is
different. An example is on Monday the focus is on strength, on
Wednesday the focus is strength endurance, and on Friday the focus is
power. In theory this way of training should produce great results in
all facets of athletic fitness. The reality is that you never make
optimal gains in one fitness area or the other. The fitness focus should
last anywhere from 4 to 10 weeks. This allows the athlete to maximize
the gains in a fitness parameter and then change to another parameter
while maintaining the previous fitness focus. This allows time for the
athlete to become desensitized to the stimulus and when the training is
focused again on previous fitness parameters adaptations can continue.
Variation should be low for athletes that have a beginner training
status. Remember that just because an athlete is at the college or pro
level does not mean that their training status is advanced. In my
personal experience and talking to other strength coaches, advanced
trained athletes are extremely rare at even the college level. With this
in mind, the amount of variation for the majority of athletes should be
low to moderate. So how much variation is low to moderate? I recommend
to start with as little variation as possible to keep the athlete
engaged in training and see what the results are. If the results are
good stay with the same amount of variation until results begin to fall
off.
Beginner trained athletes can achieve gains independent of variation
and the amount of weight lifted. The focus for these athletes should be
acquisition of appropriate form across a variety of lifts and sport
movements. Even a focus on a specific fitness parameter for these
athletes should be avoided because they will make gains and training for
a fitness parameter requires 1 repetition max test.
These facts show
that variation should be low. As an athlete becomes more and more
trained variation needs to increase substantially while focusing on one
fitness parameter and maintaining the others.
These ideas shouldn’t be confined to the weightroom. Agility and
speed training needs to be structured in respect to the principle of
variation. Too much variation limits results, especially in respect to
agility. A topic I will cover in a later blog is structure of agility
and motor control and learning. Avoidance of too much variation will
enhance the learning and appropriate development of agility.
Athletes need to be wary of commercialized fitness methods that
suggest they ‘need to keep the body guessing’. Athletes need training
that is backed by science and not selling a product. An issue that I did
not cover is that these programs do not allow times for recovery and
are rampant with overtraining syndrome. I do think some of these fitness
methods are good for the general public because they get people doing
more than nothing but are not appropriate for athletic performance.
No comments:
Post a Comment