Training for Progress or Failure

Which do you train?

While having a conversation with one of the gym regulars the other day about his training, he explained to me that as long as he was training to failure, he was confident that he was using the highest possible intensity and therefore, it didn't matter what weights he used.

Training is Stress!

Let's start off with an analogy:

If you went from a sedentary desk job to working as a Brickie’s Labourer, your body would undergo some interesting adaptations as it struggled to cope with the unfamiliar environmental stressors inherent in that profession.

You would most certainly develop calluses on your hands as a result of grasping shovels, bricks and other implements for hours each day. These calluses, however, would be exactly the same size one year after getting your new job, three years after, six years after, ad infinitum. Why? Because after the initial shock, the degree of stress to your hands never changed over that period of time.

Training is no different. Most gym goers make great progress for the first year or two, but then never look any different from that point on. Many of these people understand the importance of progression, but lack the skills necessary to implement it properly.

The Training Load

In sports science jargon, the training load is defined as:

"The sum total of all training activities for a given unit of time."

The training load has two important components, both of which can be used to provide increased loading.

Volume [the amount of work performed];

Intensity [the difficulty of the work performed].

Incidentally, as a rule of thumb, you should seek to establish a certain level of intensity first, and then add volume, rather than the other way around.

Before you can plan a certain level of progression, it becomes necessary to have a way of measuring each of these components.

Volume is usually calculated as the amount of weight lifted multiplied by the repetitions performed with that weight. However, this traditional calculation is being called into question by some latter day thinkers. Charles Poliquin was the first to say that the actual time that a muscle is under tension (TUT) must be considered as well. If this seems too anal-retentive, let me ask you a question:

If you perform a set of 10 reps with 60 kg and your lifting speed (or tempo) is 6 seconds per repetition, and your training partner used the same weight and reps, but executed each rep at 3 seconds per repetition, did you each perform an identical amount of work? Clearly, not!

This scenario illustrates the fact that the training load can be increased simply by gradually slowing down your lifting tempos over successive workouts. Reducing rest between sets also increases volume, since the workload will be performed in a shorter period of time. So, to use another example, if you and your partner both perform 3 sets of 10 reps with 60kg using identical tempos, but you rest one minute per set while your partner rests two minutes between sets, you achieved the greater volume.

Intensity is the second component of the training load, and it is normally expressed as a percentage of your 1RM (one repetition maximum), or the greatest amount of weight you can lift for one repetition in proper form. But here's the catch with 1RM's: they're always changing. This means you never quite know for sure what your 1RM is for any given lift. Which doesn't mean you shouldn't test for 1RM's every 8 weeks or so ~ you should. Doing so gives you a guideline to work with. It's just important to realize that 1RM's are a dynamic (changing) measurement.

When considering intensity, it's important to realize that any change in your exercise technique, no matter how slight, changes the equation altogether.

For instance, if you normally use a 3 second tempo (meaning, you complete each repetition in exactly 3 seconds) when testing for your 1RM, and the next time you test you're able to add 5 pounds to your 1RM but it took you an extra second to complete the lift, it's not an accurate indication of improvement. Establish your testing parameters, and then stick to them so that you have a consistent protocol when testing. If you do not, you'll have no real way of knowing whether or not you're improving.

Incidentally many people use the phrase "high intensity" to describe workouts that are actually high volume or high density (which refers to the work/rest ratio). So just to be clear about our terms, remember that intensity has nothing to do with how much pain you're in, or the fact that you frequently dry retch or experience an out-of-body episode after your leg training!  It simply refers to how much weight is on the bar relative to your current maximal ability. Using this definition, we could say that performing 140kg for 1 rep is more intense than 10 reps with 125kg, even though the latter effort is far more difficult to perform.

If you truly want to reach your potential and remain injury free, then basing your training intensity on percentages of your 1RM is much better than having a training mindset of pain, fatigue and FAILURE!