Showing posts with label reps. Show all posts
Showing posts with label reps. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Improving the Squat: Reduce the threat (squat position part 2)
Follow @mcphoo
Tweet
Yesterday i just asked about how folks were doing with their squat position - just getting into and achieving a squat. The posts at facebook and here suggested that most folks of a healthy bent kinda think of the squat as the Big Squat - going up and down - rather than just sitting in a squat position. That's ok. The same principles apply. But right now, just being happy in a bodyweight squat position is a first start especially for folks just approaching health and fitness anew. So in this post we're gonna look at one of the higher order ways to approach a better squat: reduce the threat.
And please, once again, let me invite comments from readers to speak about your own squatting-as-sitting experience (or related squat efforts) to help shape this mini series.
Reduce Threat; enable movement
The story goes that the reason a lot of us are challenged with our squat is that we spend too much time sitting and this does all sorts of things to our tendons from tightening them to shortening them to weakening them.
Any of that may be true. But then again, maybe not. Hard to say, really *why* something happens in the body, as in really, is a muscle physiologically shorter than it needs to be to achieve this position? Or is it fine, it's just tense? or weak? or something else?
One of the things we talk about in nervous system work in z-health in particular is that the nervous system is designed to respond to one state: threat/no threat. If there's threat, we get survival mode responses which means performance for anything not related to survival gets shut down. Less threat; better performance.
Let's think about this for a sec with respect to the squat if it's a challenge.
Strength: The squat requires a certain amount of strength to let us get down under control and back up under control. If our nervous system is wired for our survival, and it has some doubt about our capacity to get back up from being down, why would it let us get into a self-compromised position?
Mobility: the squat requires a certain amount of flexibility around the joints: the ankles, knees, hips, pelvis all have to be able to move in a rather coordinated way. Note i said mobility, not stability and not flexibility - more on these distinctions here.
Balance: when a bunch of joints are moving together that requires some balance work to be involved. Balance, maintaining it, is a constant dance between proprioception (where we are in space and how fast a limb is moving), vestibular information - that inner ear organ set that's telling the body if it's upright and how to correct to stay upright - and vision. Vision is our biggest input to the nervous system to keep us oriented against gravity. There are a ton of reflexes just in the back of the neck related to the eyes to keep us upright (wild, isn't it?). So the eyes and the inner ear are working together like mad all the time, along with info from nerves around the muscles and joints to coordinate where we are. Balance is a big deal
Familiarity: The squat may be a natural movement, but if we haven't been doing it since we were little, then, it's a lot to expect that it's going to still feel natural - as opposed to uncomfortable. We're plastic people - every part of us from our skin to our brains adapts to what we do regularly. And if squatting isn't part of our movement, then that adaptation will not be a big deal for our brains. It needs to be reintroduced as a skill - just like any other skill.
And just like any other skill, if we try to do it and we don't feel super comfortable, that action itself can induce stress - which again privileges survival not performance; protection not openness. If we start breathing more shallowly as we descend into the squat, that's not a great thing for telling our bod we feel safe and happy doing this movement.
Challenge anywhere affects everywhere: arthrokinetic reflex
We've seen this before at b2d - how a joint jammed somewhere can affect performance elsewhere - we saw how cranking the head back so the neck joints were squished resulted in a weaker hamstring test, and as soon as the neck went to a neutral position, the hamstrings tested stronger again. There a physiological challenge at one point in the body which compromises performance affected performance elsewhere in the body.
Given the above list of just four issues that feed into a large movement like the squat, i hope it's possible to see how a challenged squat may have more than any one single factor feeding into it.
In other words, if there's a bit of a challenge in our ankles or pelvis mobility, if there's a bit of weakness in our thighs, or if we haven't been doing squats in a long time, or if perhaps we may have even a slight vision or balance issue, maybe that big drop down to the ground is going to be perceived by our nervous system as a threat - and for our own protection we're just not going to go there.
Dialing in Threat Reduction - one system at a time
The job of a movement assessment is to check in on these factors - have actual tests for them - and be able provide ways to deal with these factors quickly. That's an option i like cuz it's personal, fast and efficient. (Why i'm having a holiday sale for online assessments, too: see link upper right corner of page)
But since we're not looking at each other face to face right now, let's take this one step at a time.
Preflight Check: how's your squat right now?
Proprioceptive Assist:
Whether you need to do this next one or not, please try it to have the comparison.
That's a really itty bitty bunch of stuff to try, isn't it? The thing is, if our bods are perceiving threat, sometimes that's all it takes: a little thing to us can be a big thing to the nervous system to help it move out of survival "must protect" mode, and letting us take the breaks off.
If any of the above helped a bit, or better than a bit, that's great. You might also find that one thing helped and another thing may have seemingly made the squat worse - that's all valuable information.
None of the above is getting into strength or flexibility particularly - it's getting into opening up some nervous system channels to help reduce threat perception to the body. This experience of getting further or feeling smoother, or for that matter something feeling worse, i hope, shows that there's a lot going on perceptually within us, and that we respond very quickly to information shifts in that system.
This rapid response to shifting stimulus also shows us why we need to test something right away so see what affect it's having because the effect IS so immediate.
If none of these drills seemed to help, that's information too, and i'd like to hear from you about what you noticed or didn't notice after either any of these drills individually or putting them together. That suggests that there's something else we haven't hit on yet that may be keeping your body from feeling safe to take the next step.
Complex Systems. To state the obvious, the variety of responses to these protocols also shows that we're really individual. What flips the switch for one person - even someone who seems so similar to another person - may be entirely different for that other person. We are COMPLEX systems - tons and tons of things are intertwining. It's this complexity that keeps me from saying "if you can't squat you just need to do X and you'll be fine" - if i hear someone say "just stretch" one more time, well, i'll get over it. Never mind me.
Ok, that's it for today.
I hope to hear from you - or your questions - so in the next couple days we can move towards a path for YOU that will help your squat. Love yourself today as you practice.
best
mc
Related Links
And please, once again, let me invite comments from readers to speak about your own squatting-as-sitting experience (or related squat efforts) to help shape this mini series.
Reduce Threat; enable movement
The story goes that the reason a lot of us are challenged with our squat is that we spend too much time sitting and this does all sorts of things to our tendons from tightening them to shortening them to weakening them.Any of that may be true. But then again, maybe not. Hard to say, really *why* something happens in the body, as in really, is a muscle physiologically shorter than it needs to be to achieve this position? Or is it fine, it's just tense? or weak? or something else?
One of the things we talk about in nervous system work in z-health in particular is that the nervous system is designed to respond to one state: threat/no threat. If there's threat, we get survival mode responses which means performance for anything not related to survival gets shut down. Less threat; better performance.
Let's think about this for a sec with respect to the squat if it's a challenge.
Strength: The squat requires a certain amount of strength to let us get down under control and back up under control. If our nervous system is wired for our survival, and it has some doubt about our capacity to get back up from being down, why would it let us get into a self-compromised position?
Mobility: the squat requires a certain amount of flexibility around the joints: the ankles, knees, hips, pelvis all have to be able to move in a rather coordinated way. Note i said mobility, not stability and not flexibility - more on these distinctions here.
Balance: when a bunch of joints are moving together that requires some balance work to be involved. Balance, maintaining it, is a constant dance between proprioception (where we are in space and how fast a limb is moving), vestibular information - that inner ear organ set that's telling the body if it's upright and how to correct to stay upright - and vision. Vision is our biggest input to the nervous system to keep us oriented against gravity. There are a ton of reflexes just in the back of the neck related to the eyes to keep us upright (wild, isn't it?). So the eyes and the inner ear are working together like mad all the time, along with info from nerves around the muscles and joints to coordinate where we are. Balance is a big deal
Familiarity: The squat may be a natural movement, but if we haven't been doing it since we were little, then, it's a lot to expect that it's going to still feel natural - as opposed to uncomfortable. We're plastic people - every part of us from our skin to our brains adapts to what we do regularly. And if squatting isn't part of our movement, then that adaptation will not be a big deal for our brains. It needs to be reintroduced as a skill - just like any other skill.And just like any other skill, if we try to do it and we don't feel super comfortable, that action itself can induce stress - which again privileges survival not performance; protection not openness. If we start breathing more shallowly as we descend into the squat, that's not a great thing for telling our bod we feel safe and happy doing this movement.
Challenge anywhere affects everywhere: arthrokinetic reflex
We've seen this before at b2d - how a joint jammed somewhere can affect performance elsewhere - we saw how cranking the head back so the neck joints were squished resulted in a weaker hamstring test, and as soon as the neck went to a neutral position, the hamstrings tested stronger again. There a physiological challenge at one point in the body which compromises performance affected performance elsewhere in the body.
Given the above list of just four issues that feed into a large movement like the squat, i hope it's possible to see how a challenged squat may have more than any one single factor feeding into it.
In other words, if there's a bit of a challenge in our ankles or pelvis mobility, if there's a bit of weakness in our thighs, or if we haven't been doing squats in a long time, or if perhaps we may have even a slight vision or balance issue, maybe that big drop down to the ground is going to be perceived by our nervous system as a threat - and for our own protection we're just not going to go there.
Dialing in Threat Reduction - one system at a time
The job of a movement assessment is to check in on these factors - have actual tests for them - and be able provide ways to deal with these factors quickly. That's an option i like cuz it's personal, fast and efficient. (Why i'm having a holiday sale for online assessments, too: see link upper right corner of page)
But since we're not looking at each other face to face right now, let's take this one step at a time.
Preflight Check: how's your squat right now?
- By all means, check how far you can go down to sitting into a squat.
Proprioceptive Assist:
- if you have shoes and socks on, if you can take them off, by all means, do.
- rock back and forth on your bare feet. bounce on the heels a bit. roll up to the toes if that feels safe. do this a few times.
- bend over on your ankle - stay standing up straight while you do this - grab a table or chair if that helps you feel more upright - little movements is all you're looking for here while keeping your body nice and tall and relaxed.
- breath in, pause, breath out for longer than you breathed in - go for twice as long out if you can staying relaxed.
- now, try your squat again and see if either you got deeper or it felt smoother
- let me know in the comments
Whether you need to do this next one or not, please try it to have the comparison.
- After doing the above drills and re-test of your squat,
- find a door way with edges you can hang onto or a pole you can hang onto or a bannister and now letting your body feel that you're taking some of the load with your arms (that's important),
- breath in, pause, breath out slowly
- let yourself down into the squat, and come back up.
- only go to where you feel comfy going - this is all to be stress free.
- did you get any deeper? did that feel any easier?
- let me know, please, here in the comments.
Vision is a mental process. It's cognitive. We have to take in info from a lens in our eye and blend it with info from the other eye, flip it so it's upside right and then interpret what the heck it means. That's work. Practicing vision, and so reducing the load, can often open up performance.
Near Far Jumps. Here's a quicky exercise i've written about before with a zhealth video called near far jumps, of focusing close then switching focus to look far - so the eyes have to work at re-focusing and doing that as fast as possible.
Eye Position. Another one? look down while going down; up while going up. Eye position triggers those postural reflexes that helps movement.
Try that, and retry your squat. Let me knowResults? Individual
That's a really itty bitty bunch of stuff to try, isn't it? The thing is, if our bods are perceiving threat, sometimes that's all it takes: a little thing to us can be a big thing to the nervous system to help it move out of survival "must protect" mode, and letting us take the breaks off.
If any of the above helped a bit, or better than a bit, that's great. You might also find that one thing helped and another thing may have seemingly made the squat worse - that's all valuable information.
None of the above is getting into strength or flexibility particularly - it's getting into opening up some nervous system channels to help reduce threat perception to the body. This experience of getting further or feeling smoother, or for that matter something feeling worse, i hope, shows that there's a lot going on perceptually within us, and that we respond very quickly to information shifts in that system.
This rapid response to shifting stimulus also shows us why we need to test something right away so see what affect it's having because the effect IS so immediate.
If none of these drills seemed to help, that's information too, and i'd like to hear from you about what you noticed or didn't notice after either any of these drills individually or putting them together. That suggests that there's something else we haven't hit on yet that may be keeping your body from feeling safe to take the next step.
Ok, that's it for today.
I hope to hear from you - or your questions - so in the next couple days we can move towards a path for YOU that will help your squat. Love yourself today as you practice.
best
mc
Related Links
- The other side of the weight room: somato-sensory hierarchy
- bendy bits and full range of motion
- Eye position to increase strength
- Complexity is not evil
PDF
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Hypertrophy: More sets are Better than 1, from Day 1
Follow @mcphoo
Tweet
In strength training, research has looked at the question of "how many sets" to make a difference for strength - does it matter if we train with 1 set or multiple sets? Most research of late has put the strength question to bed: more sets = more strength. What is less known is the relationship of hypertrophy to strength development. Strength is about at least two things: neural adaptations - muscle firing patterns - to be able to lift stuff, and structural changes to be able to support these loads without tearing ourselves apart. The latter is generally known as hypertrophy. So an open research question has been: are the changes in real strength more about the neural side of the fence than the structural? According to work done to review a TON of studies that have ever bothered to measure hypertrophy along with strength, more seems to be better here, too. In other words, hypertrophy is playing a side-by-side roll in strength training. At least as far as we can tell from eligible studies. The juicy bits are highlighted.
This review is published in the April 2010 Journal of Srength and Conditioning Research. Here's the abstract:
The key bony bit of the result above is that some of us (i count myself in here) may need to change our thinking about the role of hypertrophy especially in the early phases of training with untrained participants. Now, that finding does not mean that noticeable mass gains are happening from day one, but it would mean that structural adaptations are happening way sooner in the process than has been pretty much taken as given for some time. For instance:
Related Links:
Citation:
In strength training, research has looked at the question of "how many sets" to make a difference for strength - does it matter if we train with 1 set or multiple sets? Most research of late has put the strength question to bed: more sets = more strength. What is less known is the relationship of hypertrophy to strength development. Strength is about at least two things: neural adaptations - muscle firing patterns - to be able to lift stuff, and structural changes to be able to support these loads without tearing ourselves apart. The latter is generally known as hypertrophy. So an open research question has been: are the changes in real strength more about the neural side of the fence than the structural? According to work done to review a TON of studies that have ever bothered to measure hypertrophy along with strength, more seems to be better here, too. In other words, hypertrophy is playing a side-by-side roll in strength training. At least as far as we can tell from eligible studies. The juicy bits are highlighted.This review is published in the April 2010 Journal of Srength and Conditioning Research. Here's the abstract:
Previous meta-analyses have compared the effects of single to multiple sets on strength, but analyses on muscle hypertrophy are lacking. The purpose of this study was to use multilevel meta-regression to compare the effects of single and multiple sets per exercise on muscle hypertrophy. The analysis comprised 55 effect sizes (ESs), nested within 19 treatment groups and 8 studies. Multiple sets were associated with a larger ES than a single set (difference = 0.10 +/- 0.04; confidence interval [CI]: 0.02, 0.19; p = 0.016). In a dose-response model, there was a trend for 2-3 sets per exercise to be associated with a greater ES than 1 set (difference = 0.09 +/- 0.05; CI: -0.02, 0.20; p = 0.09), and a trend for 4-6 sets per exercise to be associated with a greater ES than 1 set (difference = 0.20 +/- 0.11; CI: -0.04, 0.43; p = 0.096). Both of these trends were significant when considering permutation test p values (p < 0.01).
Mean hypertrophy effect size for single vs. multiple sets per exercise. Data are presented as means 6 SE. *Significant difference from 1 set per exercise (p <0.05).
There was no significant difference between 2-3 sets per exercise and 4-6 sets per exercise (difference = 0.10 +/- 0.10; CI: -0.09, 0.30; p = 0.29). There was a tendency for increasing ESs for an increasing number of sets (0.24 for 1 set, 0.34 for 2-3 sets, and 0.44 for 4-6 sets). Sensitivity analysis revealed no highly influential studies that affected the magnitude of the observed differences, but one study did slightly influence the level of significance and CI width. No evidence of publication bias was observed. In conclusion, multiple sets are associated with 40% greater hypertrophy-related ESs than 1 set, in both trained and untrained subjects.Correlation of Hypertrophy with Strength. To get into the detail a little further, after the results are presented of comparing the various studies' methods, muscles, participants and periods of study, the author states:
This is a nice finding: hypertrophy - structural changes in muscle - seems to go hand in hand with strength, and right from the start of training. This is interesting in no small part because changes in measurable muscle size seem to lag behind measurable differences in strength.In a previous meta-analysis on strength using an identical statistical model, a 46% greater ES was observed for multiple sets compared with single sets (23) (Figure 3). A 40% greater ES was observed in this study. This indicates that the greater strength gains observed with multiple sets are in part because of greater muscle hypertrophy.
It is known that mechanical loading stimulates protein synthesis in skeletal muscle (39), and increasing loads result in greater responses until a plateau is reached (24). It is likely that protein synthesis responds in a similar manner to the number of sets (i.e., an increasing response as the number of sets are increased, until a plateau is reached), although there is no research examining this. The results of this study support this hypothesis; there was a trend for an increasing ES for an increasing number of sets. The response appeared to start to level off around 4-6 sets, as the difference between 2-3 sets and 4-6 sets was smaller than the difference between 1 set and 2-3 sets (figure 4)
Dose-response effect of set volume on strength from Krieger (23). Note similarity to dose-response effect for hypertrophy in Figure 2. Data are presented as means ± SE. ES = effect size. *Significantly different from 1 set per exercise (p < 0.001).
It has been proposed that the majority of initial strength gains in untrained subjects are because of neural adaptations rather than hypertrophy (28). The results of this analysis suggest that some of the initial strength gains are because of hypertrophy. Given the insensitivity and variability of hypertrophy measurements, it is likely that hypertrophy occurs in untrained subjects but is difficult to detect. This is supported by research that shows increases in protein synthesis in response to resistance training in untrained subjects (24). Recent evidence also shows measurable hypertrophy after only 3 weeks of resistance exercise (38).
What the studies do not discriminate about is whether these hypertrophic adaptations are more myofibrial or sarcoplasmic. And that rather makes sense as the main consideration has been (1) strength and (2) simply whether or not hypertrophy is more or less corelevant with the development of neural adaptations that lead to strength.
Practical Application
Practical Application
A super attribute of the JSCR articles is their "practical application" section - what can someone do with these results. The first application Krieger suggests is to get behind the awareness that hypertrophy increases from day one from more sets. In other words the number of sets does make a difference whether a beginner or not. Cool. Move it move it:
The second point is that those multiple sets make a statistically significant difference in terms of the amount of hypertrophy. More is more (at least up to 4-6 sets) for strength and structural development.Multiple sets per exercise were associated with significantly greater changes in muscle size than a single set per exercise during a resistance exercise program. Specifically, hypertrophy-related ESs were 40% greater with multiple sets compared with single sets. This was true regardless of subject training status or training program duration.
So while 1 set is certainly not useless, it mayn't be optimal (where that means before we hit a plateau). What remains to be done, according to Krieger, is to figure out that optimal set range:There was a trend for an increasing hypertrophic response to an increasing number of sets. Thus, individuals interested in achieving maximal hypertrophy should do a minimum of 2-3 sets per exercise. It is possible that 4-6 sets could give an even greater response, but the small number of studies incorporating volumes of ≥4 sets limits the statistical power and the ability to form any definitive conclusions. If time is a limiting factor, then single sets can produce hypertrophy, but improvements may not be optimal.
More research is necessary to compare the effects of 2-3 sets per exercise to ≥4 sets. Future research should also focus on the effects of resistance training volume on protein synthesis and other cellular and molecular changes that may impact hypertrophy.
Practical Awareness
For beginners interested in doing more sets, excellent. What to watch out for: fatigue. Stay fresh. Might be a grand idea to make sure to get a program that waves the volume so that there's ample recovery. Without that recovery, growth in strength/hypertrophy does seem to get retarded pretty fast.
For more experienced trainees, from what i hear among the folks i work with is: want to get bigger? lift more. More sets. more reps. more more more. The question this article nicely raises is what's an optimal more? Will be interesting to see if, when and how this question is formally explored in the future.
- What is the Pump, really? Do we know?
- Get Huge or Die?
- Occlusion training
- Supplement Curmudgeon: Does this stuff work?
- b2d General Fitness Articles
Citation:
Krieger JW (2010). Single vs. multiple sets of resistance exercise for muscle hypertrophy: a meta-analysis. Journal of strength and conditioning research / National Strength & Conditioning Association, 24 (4), 1150-9 PMID: 20300012Tweet Follow @begin2dig
Monday, July 27, 2009
Rannoch's 100s (R100s): the unWorkout that Refreshes, repairs and prepares the embodied soul for work
Follow @mcphoo
Tweet
Rannoch Donald of Simple Strength, RKC extra-ordinaire of Scotland, and one 
of the top most rated RKC instructors has a simple philosophy about basic training. Well, really he's got a lot of philosophies, but i like this one in particular.
300 is so 2007. 100 is where it's at.
Awhile ago Rannoch was telling me about his philosophy of getting 100 reps in a day of something. Doesn't matter what. Just get 'em in.
Now at the time i thought that was way cool, and as i have a variety of kettlebells around me at work and home, i started doing 100's of light snatches. That sorta faded from my view for awhile traveling, but in terms of coming back to some serious preparatory training, and feeling kinda down on myself for being deconditioned, i thought about Rannoch's 100's and thought well at least i can start there.
This was a new way of thinking about using the 100's as pump priming.
So i got a 100 out of the way with one weight.
And i felt better.
That was something when i didn't think i was going to have time then for anything.
That's a start; that's a foundation.
That's a few minutes of work i wouldn't have had before a morning shower.
So after a cup of tea, i did another 100. heavier. harder. stinkier
Aside: The pause that refreshes (when the unpause is stupid). When my hand was feeling a little raw on the bell i did something i usually don't let myself do: i put the bell down for a sec and did not feel like a failure or loser for taking a break 25 reps in to go find the chalk. I chalked. And continued. Who said it had to be non-stop every time? Maybe tomorrow it will be. Today i needed chalk - and am i glad i did or there would not be a tomorrow. (I put the ability to take a break down to intense work on getting rid of crap around goals -but that's another story)
So i got in two blocks of non-threatening-to-my-cns-first-thing-in-the-am, happy R100's before the morning shower. First one, gentle reminder with some effort in endurance; the second one more work overall. Good.
Threat Modulation value of 100's
One might say well hell that's not working out, that's not serious. that's nothing.
Well it sure as heck is greasing the neurological groove. Reminding my body about the time it takes to get in 100 consecutive perfect snatches; looking to keep that under 5 mins. Letting my body know what it feels like to find the flow of that movement. Then taking it up a notch. Still feeling safe. Letting myself get chalk to protect my hands - and so feeling safe and those reps were better. And getting in volume on a move. The perfect rep is still the perfect rep.
Those 100s then have great psychological benefit, and what's really cool, considerable neurological benefit, to let my brain, the body and their connective cns tissue work together well and get ready for the Great Work to Come.
Preparation vs A Plan of Action: 100's as the unpsych psych
As said, i'm getting ready to do some serious training. Talking about "getting ready to do some serious training" is a rather newish concept for me anything outside seasonal macro cycles for Strength and Conditioning athletes for pre during and post season training.
What i'm talking about with Preparation is the prep to get into the training i know i need to do for a particular training goal that has a specific date attached to it. What i've learned in the nutrition context and work in the habit-changing context is that when we're introducing a new behaviour (and new can be relative) we often fail because we leap into action without having a plan of how we'll deal with stuff around the action.
For me right now i know that if i try to leap into a heavy training regime some part of me will balk: i need to revise my wake up times and all the rest of it.
So Rannoch's 100's around all the moves i'll need to practice are great ways for me to prepare for the work to come; to get the conversation with my brain and body happening to make the coming 6 months effective, injury free and why not fun?
Non Excercise Physical Activity is Good Too. If you don't need R100's for your prep, that's cool. You may want to consider them as a little extra daily grit like the value of NEPA's. They're great for that too. just super in fact.
What are R100's then?
Rannoch's exact definition may be different, but my sense of them is as something pretty low threat, easy to focus on form, with some at least NEPA value to them.
Likely 100 consecutive whatevers is the goal.
If it's so intense as to require (a) breaks for recovery mid 100's or (b) a do or die requirement for a shower after said 100 cuz you stink beyond what's fit for polite company - it may just be too intense for what we're describing.
Now my second set of 100's today did not pass that later shower requirement test. Do i care? no. i wanted to get some effortfulness in. And the first R100 made that happen. ya hoo.
Hope you'll give some r100's a go - especially if you're a little freaked out about getting into an intense workout regime or if you can't think of where you'll get your workout in today. What's 100 of something you know you can do? Tweet Follow @begin2dig
of the top most rated RKC instructors has a simple philosophy about basic training. Well, really he's got a lot of philosophies, but i like this one in particular.300 is so 2007. 100 is where it's at.
Awhile ago Rannoch was telling me about his philosophy of getting 100 reps in a day of something. Doesn't matter what. Just get 'em in.
Now at the time i thought that was way cool, and as i have a variety of kettlebells around me at work and home, i started doing 100's of light snatches. That sorta faded from my view for awhile traveling, but in terms of coming back to some serious preparatory training, and feeling kinda down on myself for being deconditioned, i thought about Rannoch's 100's and thought well at least i can start there.
This was a new way of thinking about using the 100's as pump priming.
So i got a 100 out of the way with one weight.And i felt better.
That was something when i didn't think i was going to have time then for anything.
That's a start; that's a foundation.
That's a few minutes of work i wouldn't have had before a morning shower.
So after a cup of tea, i did another 100. heavier. harder. stinkier
Aside: The pause that refreshes (when the unpause is stupid). When my hand was feeling a little raw on the bell i did something i usually don't let myself do: i put the bell down for a sec and did not feel like a failure or loser for taking a break 25 reps in to go find the chalk. I chalked. And continued. Who said it had to be non-stop every time? Maybe tomorrow it will be. Today i needed chalk - and am i glad i did or there would not be a tomorrow. (I put the ability to take a break down to intense work on getting rid of crap around goals -but that's another story)
So i got in two blocks of non-threatening-to-my-cns-first-thing-in-the-am, happy R100's before the morning shower. First one, gentle reminder with some effort in endurance; the second one more work overall. Good.
Threat Modulation value of 100's
One might say well hell that's not working out, that's not serious. that's nothing.
Well it sure as heck is greasing the neurological groove. Reminding my body about the time it takes to get in 100 consecutive perfect snatches; looking to keep that under 5 mins. Letting my body know what it feels like to find the flow of that movement. Then taking it up a notch. Still feeling safe. Letting myself get chalk to protect my hands - and so feeling safe and those reps were better. And getting in volume on a move. The perfect rep is still the perfect rep.
Those 100s then have great psychological benefit, and what's really cool, considerable neurological benefit, to let my brain, the body and their connective cns tissue work together well and get ready for the Great Work to Come.
Preparation vs A Plan of Action: 100's as the unpsych psych
As said, i'm getting ready to do some serious training. Talking about "getting ready to do some serious training" is a rather newish concept for me anything outside seasonal macro cycles for Strength and Conditioning athletes for pre during and post season training.
What i'm talking about with Preparation is the prep to get into the training i know i need to do for a particular training goal that has a specific date attached to it. What i've learned in the nutrition context and work in the habit-changing context is that when we're introducing a new behaviour (and new can be relative) we often fail because we leap into action without having a plan of how we'll deal with stuff around the action.
For me right now i know that if i try to leap into a heavy training regime some part of me will balk: i need to revise my wake up times and all the rest of it.
So Rannoch's 100's around all the moves i'll need to practice are great ways for me to prepare for the work to come; to get the conversation with my brain and body happening to make the coming 6 months effective, injury free and why not fun?
Non Excercise Physical Activity is Good Too. If you don't need R100's for your prep, that's cool. You may want to consider them as a little extra daily grit like the value of NEPA's. They're great for that too. just super in fact.
What are R100's then?
Rannoch's exact definition may be different, but my sense of them is as something pretty low threat, easy to focus on form, with some at least NEPA value to them.
Likely 100 consecutive whatevers is the goal.
If it's so intense as to require (a) breaks for recovery mid 100's or (b) a do or die requirement for a shower after said 100 cuz you stink beyond what's fit for polite company - it may just be too intense for what we're describing.
Now my second set of 100's today did not pass that later shower requirement test. Do i care? no. i wanted to get some effortfulness in. And the first R100 made that happen. ya hoo.
Hope you'll give some r100's a go - especially if you're a little freaked out about getting into an intense workout regime or if you can't think of where you'll get your workout in today. What's 100 of something you know you can do? Tweet Follow @begin2dig
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
COACHING with dr. m.c. 
