Notes on Training Intensity - Part 3: Submaximal Weight Training

It is a well known fact that once an athlete has progressed to a reasonable level of strength, maximal strength levels can only be improved by lifting heavy weights (>80%1RM). Beginners and early intermediate strength trainers can see improvements with much lower percentages due to the novelty of the stimulus for their body. Once someone has passed that early development stage, training with moderate weights (50-70% 1RM) may allow them to maintain their strength in the short term but not improve it. Continued training at these lower percentages will soon result in a loss of strength.

So what value then would submaximal weight training offer for experienced individuals looking to improve maximal strength? It would at first seem like not much, especially if by nature the weights would be quite a bit below the 80% threshold. My belief is that although submax weights won’t directly make you stronger, they will provide the structural and technical foundation necessary to maximize strength work performed later. This will occur primarily through allowing a high volume of work to be done, which has the following (potential) benefits:

1. Psychological and physiological break from high intensity work

2. Preparation of connective tissues, muscles, and bone for heavier weight training

3. Increased contractile mass

4. Possible technical improvements

The first point is self – explanatory: any type of training will become psychologically and physiologically monotonous if practiced for a long enough duration. This represents a drop in the stimulus to adapt and also in motivation to push towards the same type of goal. Vladimir Zatsiorsky, in his landmark text “Science and Practice of Strength Training” suggests that training stimuli should be adjusted before they become stale in order to maximize adaptive response. By switching from high load, low volume work to moderate load, high volume sessions, the physiology and psychology of the athlete are stimulated.

Inherent to lifting weights in the 80%+range are large forces throughout the system with relatively little blood flow increases. There are certain people who can tolerate these stresses in perpetuity and have no issues however I believe most athletes and especially older athletes can benefit from a break from lifting heavy weights.

High volumes of work are associated with larger changes in blood flow to muscles, creating a more efficient network for delivering nutrients and extracting waste products. Connective tissue properties change with the type of work they are exposed to, with submaximal volume loading being associated with an increased elasticity of tendons and ligaments. These properties will lend themselves well to high load lifting by strengthening the platform the muscles have to operate from.

Hypertrophy (increase in contractile mass) of muscle tissue is typically achieved not through maximal weight loading but through submaximal weights lifted many times. The goal is essentially to maximize muscle protein breakdown by a balance of load and volume. In most literature (Zatsiorsky’s included), the range of repetitions given for maximal muscle size gain is between 6 and 10, corresponding to approximately 65-75%1RM. However there are multiple other programs out there, such as the popular German Volume Training that rely on lower percentages of 1RM and higher volumes of work for increasing contractile mass.

For all individuals, increasing muscle cross sectional area results in a greater potential for muscular strength. This potential must be realized through appropriate (high intensity) training however creating a better starting point through submax work is a reasonable goal. For CrossFit in particular, unless an individual is quite large already (i.e. average height and in the 200lb+ range), most could benefit from having more contractile units to engage.

*Note: like all things in strength training, this is not a new concept… Charles Poliquin has been a long standing advocate of accumulation-intensification (building potential – converting potential) and this idea has been in Eastern Bloc theory for at least 40 years.*

Much like rhythmical submaximal running, using higher rep sets with moderate load can help embed consistency of technique through multiple repetitions. In CrossFit terms, this might lead to an increased ability to hold form with fatigue – enhancing the ability to deliver more reps faster towards the end of a WOD. For novice and intermediates whose form deviates from rep to rep, allowing a large amount of practice without having to deal with a heavy load would be very beneficial.

Lifting weights is a skill, and admittedly lifting heavy weights is a different skill than lifting light weights although there is obviously some crossover. Training submaximally in the back squat for example involves the same muscle groups, positioning, and sequence of movement as performing heavy sets in the same movement.

Keep in mind that I am not suggesting continually training at submax effort for months at a time, as that would necessitate to long a departure from heavy load adaptations. What I am suggesting is that submaximal weight training can have several benefits that will enhance strength development when that becomes the primary focus.

In the next part of the series, I’ll discuss what submaximal weight training looks like and how repetitions, load, and sets combine to create a volume stimulus.

Notes on Training Intensity - Part 2: The Value of Submaximal Work?

A lot of my recent reading has been in the area of training for middle distance running. I find these races (800-1600, even up to 3 and 5k) intriguing for their combination of both raw speed and incredible stamina. It is very hard (maybe impossible?) to find a successful middle distance running coach who doesn’t employ a large volume of submaximal work in their program, and for good reason.

The value of submaximal work for middle distance running is threefold:

1. It creates a solid platform of aerobic adaptation

2. It conditions bones, connective, and muscle tissues to deal with the stresses of high and low velocity running

3. It re-sets the body to a calmer state in between bouts of high intensity work

Aerobic adaptation for runners is one of the Holy Grails (the other is of course speed) and there is no better way to develop it than high volumes of work. Various programs will disagree (such as CrossFit Endurance) but those are programs that – a. have not been tested in the long term, b. have not shown to be effective at the highest level of performance, or c. involve individuals who already have a massive training base from years and years of higher volume work. Developing the aerobic system enables the athlete to perform a higher volume and greater quality of intensity work later in the year, leading to more performance potential.

Conditioning the structures of the body through lower intensity work also makes sense – we get a stimulus for adaptation that is (if progressively applied) gentler than if we were to utilize high intensity methods right off the bat. Hundreds and thousands of repetitions condition and perfuse tissues (increased blood flow through capillary formation), creating a stronger platform that is faster to recover.

Lastly, the calming effect of “easy” work is often underestimated. Easy work is typically more enjoyable and less stressful on both body and mind than high intensity work, which is by nature uncomfortable. Two of the most restorative training sessions one can participate in are an easy session of trail running or a relaxing swimming session. Research suggests that the nervous system benefits from this type of session through a relaxing of the nervous system and re-setting of the body to a homeostatic state (versus a body that is in a continual state of stress-adaptation).

Surely it makes sense for running, but what about CrossFit? Well, since many CrossFit events are in the 2 – 10 minute range (i.e. running 800 – 3k), I think the concepts of training for middle distance runners are directly applicable to our sport also. Of course, we have the necessity of not only having to develop the energy system pathways but also high levels of connective tissue and muscular strength – so our submaximal base work should contain two components – submaximal aerobic and submaximal weight training.

In Part 3, I'll look at submaximal weight training and the potential benefits it can have for CrossFit and other sport athletes.

Notes on Training Intensity – Part 1: High Intensity all the Time?

This is part 1 of (potentially) a 3 or 4 part blog series. Read and enjoy, feel free to comment!

There are a lot of simple statements about training that just make sense. They tend to get overlooked by virtue of their simplicity and logic – overshadowed by more outrageous claims and marketing hype. The truth is that if you can keep your training philosophies as simple as possible, you will progress. In this blog I’m going to discuss training intensity, and by “intensity” I am referring to the level of effort/discomfort/stress of a training session. In support, I will supply two basic statements that if followed, will provide the guidance to higher and higher levels of physical fitness.

1. You can’t train high intensity all the time

2. Never underestimate the value of submaximal training

I’m sure to some of my CrossFit crew the first statement might seem like sacrilege, but give me a shot and I think I’ll convince you that I’m on the right side of the law. For those of you involved in other forms of training for sport, these concepts will resonate immediately.

Firstly, here are my observations of what happens to people who train to maximum (or close to maximum) too regularly:

1. They experience massive initial gains (GOOD – sort of)
2. After 3 months to a year they start to accumulate muscle and joint pain
3. They begin to get nagging injuries
4. Their “maximum” effort becomes, over time, a lower and lower percentage of their actual maximum capability
5. They burn out

So what exactly is happening here? Definitely the process of training to maximum is a powerful stimulus for adaptation – hence the very rapid gains in strength and overall fitness we often see in programs like CrossFit. Depending on the initial fitness level of the individual who starts such a program, they may progress very well for up to ~2years following a high intensity training program (generally, the lower the initial fitness level, the longer the person will progress in this system). After that point, there is a stagnation and then regression in performance and ability to tolerate high intensity work (increase in injury and symptoms of overtraining). For some individuals, this process may only take 6 months and is also dependent on the frequency and structure of the training they are performing (i.e. Crossfit.com versus a more progressive plan).

The main issue for both performance and overall body health is that by nature, high intensity work is low volume. Low volume work (either high or low intensity) does not inherently provide enough of a base level of development from which to progress from. High intensity work exposes muscles, joints, and connective tissues to aggressive stresses repeatedly – stresses that those tissues are not adequately prepared to deal with.

High intensity work is also high stress. This has both physiological and psychological impacts. Physiologically, too much intensity leads to a pervading environment of stress on your both your nervous and musculoskeletal systems. This stress leads to excessive muscular tension and alters hormone balance. Psychologically, high intensity is a fatiguing objective to obtain at every session, and can lead to lower interest in training and less motivation to push harder when the workout requires it.

These factors combine to create the situation I outlined above – “high intensity” becomes “moderately high intensity” over time by virtue of the inability of the body and mind to support true high intensity work. The fallacy is that the individual who is undergoing this performance decay will feel that they are executing at maximum output when in actual fact they are well below their potential.

In part 2, I'll discuss the value of submaximal training in support of high intensity activity. Comments, retorts, and questions are welcome!