Personal Training 15a: Resistance training: fundamentals

This post is part of an ongoing series about my learning process as I train to become a personal trainer.  In this post, I’m considering the fundamentals of resistance training.  If you have time to read the whole thing, I’d be interested to hear how different my approach is from yours…      

***        

My course notes       

My course notes make the following points about resistance training.  I have inserted my comments along the way:       

• Repetition ranges – power is trained from 1 -3 reps, strength from 6 – 10 reps, hypertrophy from 8 – 12 reps, and muscular endurance from 15 – 25 reps.  I broadly agree with this.  The one significant change I would make would be that strength is better built between 3 – 6 reps.
• Compound vs. isolation exercises – compound exercises are more functional than isolation exercises as they reflect the way in which muscles are used in a wide range of activities.  I can’t disagree with that but I would go further to say that I would recommend everyone begin with compound exercises to start with.
• Set volumes – sets should range between 1 – 6 sets.  I think this is unnecessarily limiting.  I think that most people need to reverse their sets and reps from what they are doing at the moment… (i.e. 10 sets of 3 reps rather than 3 sets of 10 reps).
• Workout length – workouts should last no longer than 60 minutes because of the changes in hormone profiles.  I don’t like prolonging a workout longer than is necessary but if occasionally I end up at 1 hour 15 minutes then I am not going to lose any sleep over it.
• Useful strength training methods include:
  • Delorme-Watkins – 3 sets of 10 reps at 50%, 75% and 100% of 10RM.  This is essentially two warm-up sets for a 10RM high intensity training method.  To my mind, this would work for rehabiliation or beginners but not for anyone else.
  • Berger - 3 sets of 6 reps, each set to failure.  I think that this is too intense and too much volume for pretty much anyone to make progress on.  I cannot see how it could be useful.
  • Tri-sets – sets of three exercises performed consecutively, such that the exercises range from most complex to least complex (e.g. squat, leg press, leg extension).  Charles Poliquin uses these regularly, so I can only assume that it is a useful method for advanced lifters.
  • Giant sets – as for tri-sets but with four or more exercises.  I have never seen anything like this programmed before and do not see it being of much benefit for anyone except very advanced lifters.
  • Supersets – alternating sets of exercises.  I like this method very much and like to use it to save time in workouts.  It’s particularly useful for beginners, where muscular rest after exercises is not really an issue.
  • Pyramid training – sets with rising weight and falling weights.  This is not actually pyramid training.  They mean ramping sets, which a lot of bodybuilders are doing at the moment with great success.  Real pyramid training is large numbers of sets with rising and then falling reps, typically starting from 1 and proceeding 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 with short rests.  I like pyramid training for doing a big volume of useful exercises without creating soreness or unnecessary hypertrophy.
  • Stripping / drop sets – sets with little rest with falling weights. I don’t like this approach as I think it is too intense for most people.
  • Forced repetitions – sets with assistance from the spotter.  I don’t like this approach as I think it is too intense for most people.
  • Cheating - sets with assistance from a little “body English”.  I don’t like this approach as I think it is unnecessary and potentially damaging for most people.  A good example would be the biceps curl.  Most people find that it is hard to increase the weight beyond a certain point without using some momentum.  However, this is not because it is fundamentally necessary to use momentum to get past that level.  It is because they are having trouble stabilising the weight because their upper back is weak.  First, strengthen the upper back, then get big guns… 

***        

At the moment, my own philosophy of resistance training is based on the following observations:      

• Big compound lifts rock
• Form is key
• Stage of development matters a lot
• Most people are beginners in most or some respects
• Linear progressions are fast and highly effective

I also have some more thoughts that I am currently testing to see whether I believe in them as strongly.  I will talk about these in detail at some future date as I’m not yet ready to commit to them.  They include:   

• The benefits of supersets – I have a strange belief that training opposing muscle groups in the upper body makes you more muscular, faster than doing the same exercises after each other
• Set and rep schemes – I like high sets of low reps for almost all purposes
• Intensity levels and stage of development – I think that the intensity levels that give results rise steadily the more you train

***      

An alternative look at the fundamentals of resistance training      

So this is the kind of material I would have preferred to see in my course notes:       

• Big, compound exercises are essential - I cannot see the point in anyone doing anything other than squats (and variations), deadlifts (and variations), overhead presses and bench presses, row variations and pull ups/chin ups until they have achieved a basic level of competence on those lifts.
• Form is key - getting really good at a bad squat is a very bad idea.  I have personal experience of this and I can honestly say that it’s a really good way of hurting yourself in ways that will haunt you for the rest of your life.
• Stage of development is critical - beginners progress very differently from intermediate lifters, who progress very differently from advanced lifters.  However, it’s the stage of development of the lift that is important, not the person.  So if your client spent two years doing nothing but bench and curls then suddenly start squatting, then I would expect their squat to respond as a beginner’s squat, not as an intermediate lifter’s squat.
  • Beginners progress more quickly than anyone else – training a beginner, I would expect them to make the best progress on a beginner programme.  An advanced programme will progress much, much slower than a beginner programme.
  • Most normal people are beginners – unless your client had exposure to a proper weights room at school, spent a lot of time locked away in their garage with serious amounts of weight, or joined a powerlifting or Olympic lifting club a couple of years back, I would look at them as a beginner and would expect them to benefit from a beginner programme.
  • If in doubt, the client is a beginner – I like Rippetoe’s standards for describing the lifts at which people are beginners, intermediates and advanced lifters.  If you haven’t already picked up a copy, you can find a copy here.  Looking at those standards, I think people can make steady, basic linear or autoregluated linear progress up to the point at which they are at the intermediate standard.  And I think that most people could then make single rep linear progression right the way through to advanced…
  • A beginner programme is a linear programme – I believe that the fastest way to progress in lifting weights is by linear increases.  This is because the shortest distance between two points is a straight line.  I would always put beginners on a linear programme unless there were exceptional reasons not to (which I can’t think of at the moment).
• There is more than one way to do a linear programme – in fact, there are many.  Here are three of the more obvious ones, which I have made up my own names for (there are probably clever names for them out there somewhere):
  • Basic linear progression – this is where the weight goes up by a fixed increment every single workout.  It doesn’t matter whether a lift is missed or not.  The weight goes up.  Starting Strength is based on this principle, although certain get-out clauses apply.
  • Autoregulated linear progression - a less aggressive linear progression is where all the reps of a set/rep progression are completed before the weight is increased.  Most people instinctively end up doing this kind of autoregulated linear progression unless they take advice from someone and start doing something more complicated.
  • Single rep linear progression – an even less aggressive linear progression is where sets across are increased by one rep per set per workout.  Hepburn A and Hepburn B are based on this principle.  So the first workout of Hepburn A has 8 sets of 2 reps.  This rises to 1 set of 3 and 7 sets of 2 the next workout and 2 sets of 3 and 6 sets of 2 the following workout.  After 8 sets of 3 are achieved, a new weight is selected and the set/rep scheme reverts to 8 sets of 2 reps again. 
• Linear programmes are valuable so treat them carefully – there is nothing more powerful and effective than a linear programme.  It is the fastest way to get from point A to point B.  If you can get one to work then you are on to a winner.  With that in mind…
  • It’s easier not to get stuck than it is to get unstuck – there is nothing worse than getting stuck during a linear progression sequence.  It’s like all the cards come tumbling down on you.  I have found that it is much better to switch to a less aggressive linear progression scheme before the sticking point happens.
  • Leave them only with great care – if you stop doing linear programming, I think you are making a big statement about your stage of development.  I think you are saying that you are so strong that you cannot progress any more using linear progression.  That’s fine, if it is true, but it’s a big statement.  I am pretty confident that, as a male, that means a double bodyweight squat and a 2.5x bodyweight deadlift at least and, as a female, a 1.5x bodyweight squat and a double bodyweight deadlift.  And I mean to find out if I can push those numbers even higher, because I think I can…
• After linear progression, you need to plan your goals – I think that the point that linear progression stops working is a good time to decide what your goals are.  I think this is the case because the options after linear progression tend to produce slightly different results.  For pure strength athletes, conjugate periodisation is going to be very attractive.  For bodybuilders, DC or ramping sets is going to be more relevant.  For athletes, some sort of periodisation that doesn’t leave them in a broken, sweaty heap every three weeks is more helpful.  However, until linear progression stops working, I would always use it in preference to anything else.

 ***        

I would love to hear from you to see how different our approaches are.  What do you think are the fundamentals of strength training?