This is a PT question. I was trying to explain this to my PT. Answer me this.. "single leg raises" with a 5 pound ankle wrap. I explained to him that this straight leg raise for a beginner and someone who had crappy knees like I do, puts a great deal of stress on the knee. Someone who is starting out, with this position, can in fact cause the quad to work really hard because the weight is at the farthest point from the midline. Bringing the weight closer to the first joint (the knee) in the leg from the foot, might be safer and more effective to initiate the contraction of the quad instead of stressing the low backout and the knee. Your thoughts? Sept 20 2024
@@g.i.d_ftwg.i.d_ftw3205 I rarely recommend testing a true 1RM. Each session is a "test" in a way. 225 x 5 # RPE 9 today. 227 x 5 @ 9 RPE, the following week would indicate the person is getting stronger. You could put the numbers into a 1RM prediction equation as well, to get a better idea of how things are trending. 225 x 5 = 1RM of 253 (approx). Let's say that on week 4 of the strength phase, the person is now doing 235 x 5. That works out to a predicted 1RM of 264 lbs (approx). So without ever formally testing, we can get a good idea of how the 1RM changed. But for those who like to test, every four to six weeks generally works well, depending on the overall goal and cycle length.
Thanks! I hadn't thought much about it, to be honest. Here's the link to the full lecture on weight management: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-HGG4I2oP1dg.htmlsi=Hl3GewCxdmfwT36S
I read a paper once, about high velocity lifts result in more hypertrophy then slow reps? Is it because you active more motorneurons, like more type IIa/x? Let me know what you think:9
Theoretical pros and cons. Lifting with greater velocity can increase motor unit recruitment (I don't have the exact reference but the author is McBride, J) and thus, the amount of muscle fibers exposed to tension. But, the faster the contraction, the less overall tension imparted to each muscle fiber. This is due to force - velocity relationship. So you can justify both sides, depending on the angle of the argument. The question is...would we see a noticeable difference in hypertrophy over a 10 week program? Whether you choose to lift with high velocity or control your tempo, my bet is that the amount of hypertrophy would be the same, provided volume and proximity to failure were the same. Finally, if a higher velocity of contraction was better for contaction (or an independent stimulator of hypertrophy) we would expect to see massive calves in basketball and volleyball players due to the repeated jumps
@@brentwelsh8960 Really good explanation, your points make good sense, thanks for taking the time to write them. I would like to request a video on the break down of hybrid training, pros/cons ect. :)
Really love the way u explain it i have a question there is lot of misconception about what is progressive overload and why is it necessary if taking muscle to failure is the goal for hypotropy why to progress.. another doubt is about CNS fatigue and muscle fatigue after a hard set is it the ATP that's depleted or is it the CNS fatigue?
What's stimulus to fatigue ratio and is 5 to ,6 sets enough to maximize mechanical tension over the week provided intensity is high 0rir and form is good ?
Thank you. ATP and CNS Fatigue A lack of ATP only causes fatigue, in theory. In reality, even when we are exhausted, muscle biopsies show that ATP levels are still relatively high. "CNS fatigue" refers to fatigue that originates at the level of the CNS rather than at the muscle site. Metabolic byproducts of muscle contraction diffuse from the muscle cell into the blood and change blood chemistry. The changes in blood chemistry can affect things at the level of the CNS, such as motor unit recruitment. If we can't sustain the level of motor unit recruitment, then ATP levels within the muscle cell are inconsequential. If we are not recruiting enough motor units to produce the requisite force, then ATP levels in the muscle cell are relatively inconsequential.
As long as most of your sets are taken close to failure, then progressive overload will be built into the program. If 10 reps at 110 lbs resulted in "near failure" by the 10th rep, then we can assume a stimulus was applied and we should experience some micro-adaptations. Meaning, next week we should be a little bit stronger. Thus, the overload we provide our system should progress accordingly. Theoretically, if next week we perform 10 reps at 110 lbs, again, we would expect that to be insufficient overload. It was sufficient, LAST WEEK, but ideally we experienced some micro adaptations such that we can push the overload a little bit more. Perhaps doing 11 reps at 110 lbs to provide the appropriate stimulus. Or 10 reps with 112.5 lbs. Hope that helps
@@memos106 "stimulus-to-fatigue" ratio is a theoretical concept. You weigh the adaptation potential "stimulus" vs the recovery time (fatigue). An example would be deadlifts versus hamstring curls for hamstring development. You can get good growth from both exercises, but the deadlift would cause a lot more overall "fatigue" (muscles involved in maintaining the grip, proper back position, etcetera are also involved in the movement). The "take away message" it's not that one exercise would be better than the other. It's an appreciation for the theoretical"stimulus to fatigue ratio" and using that info to help guide your exercise selection. The "stimulus to fatigue ratio" is mostly related to exercise selection, and not necessarily sets, reps, or RIR/RPE. The growth stimulus is applied toward the end of each set, as you approach a level of sufficient overload (proximity to failure, RPE, RIR, etc). One set provides a growth stimulus, a second set provides another, and a third another. However, you must balance volume (# of sufficiently challenging sets) with recovery. There will be diminishing returns on each successive set and as you accumulate sets, you're more likely to accumulate "junk volume" - work that does not add to the hypertrophy stimulus, but adds to fatigue and can delay recovery
wow, what a fantastic video. I’m about to binge all your content and increase my knowledge . Thank you for your hard work! P.S I hope the algorithm looks after you and promoted your channel further because you deserve it !
Thanks. Just a heads up that the video is a few years old. Around the 2 minute mark I talk about things that can initiate increases in muscle protein synthesis from a training standpoint. I've updated my lectures and only use mechanical tension as the primary stimulator of hypertrophy.
@@OmarShenno ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Tj9JgC9MHi0.htmlsi=4Ly5aKLUYvhRoA-k This clip is an updated perspective on what stimulates hypertrophy.
ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Tj9JgC9MHi0.htmlsi=NG2uBdFc9quqynFd Thanks for the feedback. Above is a link to a clip that should answer your question. Let me know if you want more detail.
Sorry, I'm just seeing this question now. It would be difficult to say that it's "better", for everyone. It's based on the individuals ability. We want to be sure that the amortization phase is quick enough to get the training effect that we are looking for. A higher box, requires more strength to overcome the forces of gravity. You can measure ground contact time using a jump mat (250 ms is a good guideline). Otherwise you have to use your eye. As you gain experience watching people jump, you'll get a better metric of what it should look like, regardless of box height.
Thought it might be helpful to explain why it's PV for Oly lifts. PV occurs at a pretty consistent point in Oly lifts (top of the 2nd pull). It doesn't matter "how" the athlete reaches PV, they just need to reach it. PV, essentially, detemines the time available for the athlete to catch the bar. MV would represent the MV for the entire lift; which can be misleading. Different athletes can use different strategies/techniques during the lift based on: specific coaching, injuries, anthropometrics, etc. SQ, BP, and DL have acceleration and deceleration phases that kind of cancel each other. Also, heavy reps are often "grinded". We see differences in MV @ 1RM between beginners and advanced lifters, with advanced lifters being slower @ their 1RM. Something like that would be lost in PV. Summary: PV for Oly lifts and MV for others.
@@brentwelsh8960 I'd appreciate a video touching on knee health (tendon health in general), specifically how to train for injury prevention as well as at-home practices that could aid in rehab for tendinopathy
@@jonathangogi3076 sure thing! Probably going to take a bit before I get it up though. The semester is coming to an end here and I'm slammed with marking
After being very interested in interval training especially vs steady-state training for years, this is absolutely the best presentation on the subject I've ever seen. I'm a personal trainer and what's amazing is that most of the fitness industry (1) doesn't understand or perform intervals as they apply to energy systems and (2) thinks the only point of intervals is to bring you to near-death (not literally) efforts because customers believe they've only really worked out if they're 100% exhausted (in essence the customers and their understandable lack of knowledge are leading the workouts rather than the fitness professionals). This is the point of most spin "interval" workouts as well as rowing in "Orange Theory" and other group fitness-based businesses e.g. Barry's Bootcamp. The number 1 thing they don't understand is rest. I've done Peleton spin classes with 8 entire Tabata rounds i.e. 64 work intervals in 45 minutes. Or ones where it's just all-out effort followed by supposedly greater all-out effort. I guess it means they're almost entirely aerobic (but they don't understand that) which maybe is okay if you do it once a week but doing all-out "interval" spin or other studio classes 5 times a week is a recipe for overtraining. I think your fitness will either plateau or get worse. Anyway, despite my digression, if you want to understand the nuances and details of interval training, this is the best reference I've come upon since I became interested in the science of interval training years ago.
