How pre-overtraining feels to you?
Users viewing topic: & 1 Guest
| PaulSavage |  | ... | 15-08-2015 @ 14:14 |
Member 2775, 6927 posts | I dont see what the discussion is, you tear down the muscle, rest, eat, sleep, then when its recovered you do it again. Its not rocket science. This is why ed hall has trained primarily as a bodybuilder, to get bigger and stronger. | ||
| Robbo91 |  | ... | 15-08-2015 @ 16:09 |
Doesn't like tall people very much. Member 5708, 391 posts SQ 260, BP 195, DL 275730.0 kgs @ 137.5kgs UnEq | Sparrow said:The sorest I have ever been was after doing a Bodypump session (work forced me to at the time). I have never met anybody who got swole from doing Bodypump alone. I did one once and I agree that it's also the sorest I have ever been. Far worse than twenty rep squatting even. | ||
| Wayne_Cowdrey | | ... | 15-08-2015 @ 17:33 |
 Still got a little bit of strength Member 400, 22301 posts | So, soreness isn't a good thing then? I 'feel' that it is, and enjoy a bit of next day soreness (apart from in the erectors). One heavy single is sufficient to achieve it. | ||
| AMH_Power | | ... | 15-08-2015 @ 18:24 |
we ride at dawn Member 4363, 1442 posts SQ 310, BP 250, DL 320880.0 kgs @ 104kgs UnEq | Wayne_Cowdrey said:So, soreness isn't a good thing then? I 'feel' that it is, and enjoy a bit of next day soreness (apart from in the erectors). One heavy single is sufficient to achieve it. When the muscle is stressed the satellite cells proliferate/multiply, the 'off-loaded' satellite piece be it through division or breakdown, take part in an auto-immune function where they fuse to the site of stress. This doesn't create more skeletal muscle but more contractile proteins (myosin in particular with raw strength training, but usually myosin and actin). Once this fusion has happened (usually 24-48 hours) the actin/myosin can assist skeletal muscle in contraction as they will respond to ignition from axon/synapse of nerve endings. However, while this fusion is still happening (like, turning a good quality set into a back off and AMRAP...), the mysoin/actin is available for ADP to bind to to use as energy... leaving the original cell exposed to catabolism...in that it will break down to achieve the task at hand, this breakdown will then cause a release of hydroxyproline which in turn will cause DOMs. In turn, actin and myosin will still patch up the original stress, but now we have scar tissue and LOST muscle cells will not regenerate; fibres are pretty much fixed except for in the rare occurance of hyperplasia which is still a bit of pseudo-science. So; Scenario 1: More actin, more myosin, all original cells in tact and a fast recovery. Scenario 2: More actin, more myosin, original cells used for energy, scar tissue and slow recovery. Obviously other people may have anecdotes for people defying biology. | ||
| Luke82 | | ... | 15-08-2015 @ 18:45 |
 Enjoys his parents fully stocked fridge. Member 3476, 868 posts SQ 170, BP 136, DL 217.5523.5 kgs @ 95kgs UnEq | I don't get this, must be all the big words. If you're saying it's a biological impossibility to get bigger and stronger through the 'tear it down, rest it and rebuild it' process then how do you explain all the people that have used it successfully? Surely they can't all be dismissed as anecdote. | ||
| Steve | | ... | 15-08-2015 @ 18:48 |
nothing to hide, please follow my life on webcam Member 255, 3732 posts | PaulSavage said: slimsim said: When was the last time you ran a marathon Paul? If you haven't then how do you know it's "not the same kind of soreness", which in itself is a laughable concept. Laughable for what reason? Have never done marathon but ran long distances. That soreness is more ache, skin being sore, joint pain etc not muscles being sore to touch, legs giving way under you 4 days later from hard leg training session kind of soreness. A long hill marathon/ultra leads to exactly the same kind of muscle soreness and legs unable to take your weight you'd get after a heavy squat session, just many times worse. | ||
| Wayne_Cowdrey | | ... | 15-08-2015 @ 18:49 |
Still got a little bit of strength Member 400, 22301 posts | I'm afraid this is all well beyond my level of comprehension Aaron. In lay language what would you say about my training style, i.e. low frequency, low volume, based around near max singles? | ||
| AMH_Power | | ... | 15-08-2015 @ 18:49 |
we ride at dawn Member 4363, 1442 posts SQ 310, BP 250, DL 320880.0 kgs @ 104kgs UnEq | Luke82 said:I don't get this, must be all the big words. If you're saying it's a biological impossibility to get bigger and stronger through the 'tear it down, rest it and rebuild it' process then how do you explain all the people that have used it successfully? Surely they can't all be dismissed as anecdote. I'm not saying that, the process is correct. But what I am saying is, there is a point at where the development is no more, but recovery takes longer and long term injury risk is greater. The feeling of 'sore' 4 days later etc, is not part of normal strength development, and can be counter productive to progress, be it short or long term. | ||
| AMH_Power | | ... | 15-08-2015 @ 18:55 |
we ride at dawn Member 4363, 1442 posts SQ 310, BP 250, DL 320880.0 kgs @ 104kgs UnEq | Wayne_Cowdrey said:I'm afraid this is all well beyond my level of comprehension Aaron. In lay language what would you say about my training style, i.e. low frequency, low volume, based around near max singles? Wayne, I've trained how you do with great success. I have literally had sessions where I have gone to the gym, warmed up with 60kg bench, single 140, single 200 and left... 10 mins work; done this for 4-5 sessions, then set a pb on the next! If you progress like this, then you are lucky and may have LOW exercise tolerance (fast gainer). Something has to keep progressing though to keep the stimulus and adaptation going.... be it volume, frequency or intensity etc. I am agreeing with pretty much everyone on the thread, but basically saying that soreness can accompany training, but it doesn't need to for the same level of improvement, and so shouldn't be used as a reference of progress. | ||
| Luke82 | | ... | 15-08-2015 @ 19:47 |
Enjoys his parents fully stocked fridge. Member 3476, 868 posts SQ 170, BP 136, DL 217.5523.5 kgs @ 95kgs UnEq | AMH_Power said: I'm not saying that, the process is correct. But what I am saying is, there is a point at where the development is no more, but recovery takes longer and long term injury risk is greater. The feeling of 'sore' 4 days later etc, is not part of normal strength development, and can be counter productive to progress, be it short or long term. Ah I see, makes sense now. For a minute my whole (limited) understanding of training got turned upside down ha ha. I tend not to be excessively sore after training but still thought the whole aim was to do some "damage" to the muscle fibres so that they grow back stronger. So if people tend to do better with lower volumes, they would actually be better responders to training, and therefore more likely to see little benefit from more training volume? | ||
| AMH_Power | | ... | 15-08-2015 @ 20:10 |
we ride at dawn Member 4363, 1442 posts SQ 310, BP 250, DL 320880.0 kgs @ 104kgs UnEq | Luke82 said: Ah I see, makes sense now. For a minute my whole (limited) understanding of training got turned upside down ha ha. I tend not to be excessively sore after training but still thought the whole aim was to do some "damage" to the muscle fibres so that they grow back stronger. So if people tend to do better with lower volumes, they would actually be better responders to training, and therefore more likely to see little benefit from more training volume? Exactly, sorry for the confusion...not very good at getting my point across, thanks. | ||
| deleted2_20210523 | | ... | 15-08-2015 @ 20:19 |
Member 2606, 11453 posts SQ 170, BP 117.5, DL 215502.5 kgs @ 91.6kgs UnEq | deleted | ||
| JackRevans | | ... | 15-08-2015 @ 20:48 |
 'There was also a sausage in my mouth.' Member 2477, 16481 posts SQ 190, BP 130, DL 235555.0 kgs @ 83kgs UnEq | I thought you were a big believer in high volume to practice the lift? or is that when its lots of sets of low reps? sorry I'm not very clever and easily confused | ||
| Wayne_Cowdrey | | ... | 15-08-2015 @ 21:02 |
Still got a little bit of strength Member 400, 22301 posts | kirkynick - pretty much, yes. It stems from laziness, but feels natural and has served me quite well. When I've tried to increase my work load I've found it counter-productive. I think the mind (i.e. belief in what you're doing) adds a dimension, on top of all the biochemistry stuff, but I think scientists might dismiss that. | ||
| AMH_Power | | ... | 15-08-2015 @ 21:25 |
we ride at dawn Member 4363, 1442 posts SQ 310, BP 250, DL 320880.0 kgs @ 104kgs UnEq | JackRevans said:I thought you were a big believer in high volume to practice the lift? or is that when its lots of sets of low reps? sorry I'm not very clever and easily confused Volume is good when done as 'overall work', regardless of reps. As reps go up, weight comes down... The intensity (weight) governs the TYPE of adaptation. The volume (overall work) governs the MAGNITUDE of the adaptation. Doing high reps means the intensity must come down, if the intensity comes down then it goes without saying that the type of training will shift from power, then to strength, then as we approach 10 reps or so, strength endurance. Once we are in the realms of 20+, we aren't training strength...just work capacity. The slow twitch fibres may get some adaptation, but in the process over a long period of time training like this would see the fast twitch transition to slow twitch and is non-reversible. As a side note, humans evolved or were made(don't want a darwinism vs creationist battle!) for speed; we have a VERY short force arm in relation to the weight arm with regards to leverage of our joints. | ||