spreading workouts to high frequency?!

[Pericu]

Hi,

I would like to get your opinion on spreading the templates to a higher frequency. Just saw many people splitting the workout to 2xday/3xweek and that made me thinking, if I even could split it to 6x a week?! I.e. splitting monday volume to monday & tuesday....wednesday to wednesday and thursday, and so on...
I know that not anybody has the time or dedication to be in the gym 6x/week, but I do

Wanted to check if you could tell me if something like this might be appropriate;
(Based off of week 2 #37)
Day 1 Squats, SPP slot 1, GPP slot 1
Day 2 Bench, GPP slot 1, SPP slot 1
Day 3 DL, GPP slot 1, SPP slot 1
Day 4 Bench, GPP slot 1, SPP slot 1
Day 5 Squat, GPP slot 1, SPP slot 1
Day 6 Bench, GPP slot 1, SPP slot 1

Thanks in advance

[BuccioniPL]

Hi,

I would like to get your opinion on spreading the templates to a higher frequency. Just saw many people splitting the workout to 2xday/3xweek and that made me thinking, if I even could split it to 6x a week?! I.e. splitting monday volume to monday & tuesday....wednesday to wednesday and thursday, and so on...
I know that not anybody has the time or dedication to be in the gym 6x/week, but I do

Wanted to check if you could tell me if something like this might be appropriate;
(Based off of week 2 #37)
Day 1 Squats, SPP slot 1, GPP slot 1
Day 2 Bench, GPP slot 1, SPP slot 1
Day 3 DL, GPP slot 1, SPP slot 1
Day 4 Bench, GPP slot 1, SPP slot 1
Day 5 Squat, GPP slot 1, SPP slot 1
Day 6 Bench, GPP slot 1, SPP slot 1

Thanks in advance

Hi there!


Interesting question.

As you probably know, around the web there’s a document: “the frequency project”. It reports a study which pretends to  demonstrate that, given a fixed amount of volume, the higher the frequency, the better the performance.

My opinion:
-   the study is very limited in time. You cannot extrapolate that what is true after 3 months, it remains true after 12 or 24.
-   secondly, what is the duration of the improvement for the "high frequency" guys compared to the “low frequency” ones?

These are partly old questions and as far as I know, there is not a definitive answer.
Training is a defective process. There are very few fixed rules.

Given that, my opinion on your question is that you should train a number of time per week CONSISTENT with your level of performance (intermediate? you should train about 3 times a week).
You should increase volume ones you increase performance, in order to progressively increase the overall stimulation. Or if you want, when you have enough work capacity.

Furthermore, what about if you train 6 times a week and then you stall? Ok, you can increase volume and work-out duration.
But for me, it’s easier and wiser to start at a point right for you (maybe you’re advanced and you need many work-outs), then increase in YEARS your volume and frequency.

In general, do not be hurry. Powerlifting is not a rush, it’s much more a marathon and requires a slow progressive adaptation.

Just my two cents.

[Robert Frederick]

I don't think it would offer any advantages other than shortening single workouts and possibly increasing overall travel time. You still bench 3x/wk, squat 2x/wk, and deadlift 1x/wk. So the frequency is the same. So is the volume. Metabolic stress would also decrease unless you made up for it with added additional exercises.

[Pericu]

As you probably know, around the web there’s a document: “the frequency project”. It reports a study which pretends to  demonstrate that, given a fixed amount of volume, the higher the frequency, the better the performance.

My opinion:
-   the study is very limited in time. You cannot extrapolate that what is true after 3 months, it remains true after 12 or 24.
-   secondly, what is the duration of the improvement for the "high frequency" guys compared to the “low frequency” ones?

Are you referring to the study with the norwegian powerlifters?
Anyway, I agree with you on that topic. As far as studies regarding higher frequency, they aren't really distinctive and they all leave a lot of questions open. I won't rely on them at all.

Given that, my opinion on your question is that you should train a number of time per week CONSISTENT with your level of performance (intermediate? you should train about 3 times a week).
You should increase volume ones you increase performance, in order to progressively increase the overall stimulation. Or if you want, when you have enough work capacity.

Furthermore, what about if you train 6 times a week and then you stall? Ok, you can increase volume and work-out duration.
But for me, it’s easier and wiser to start at a point right for you (maybe you’re advanced and you need many work-outs), then increase in YEARS your volume and frequency.

I see your point and I agree with you to some extent.
If we say, we got an Intermediate lifter who jumps right into something like the "Bulgarian method", then your question is more than valid. He doesn't have anywhere to go from there. The diminishing marginal return would be detrimental for the long term progress. People have to understand that the bulgarian athletes eased into the routine over a couple of years!

That being said, let's get back to my question of spreading the sheiko routines.

I don't change the volume, I don't change the intensity and all that kind of stuff. The program is (kind of) still the same. What I was thinking about is spreading the workouts.

Let me give you an example, maybe that'll make things more obvious;

On the normal #37

Week 2, Day 1
SQ->Bench->SQ->3GPP

Now let's take this ONE workout and spread it into 2 days

Day 1;
SQ->SQ->1GPP
Day 2;
Bench->2GPP


So it is the volume and intensity load of 3xweek, so you got plenty of room left for improvement. Hope you see my point.

I don't think it would offer any advantages other than shortening single workouts and possibly increasing overall travel time. You still bench 3x/wk, squat 2x/wk, and deadlift 1x/wk. So the frequency is the same. So is the volume. Metabolic stress would also decrease unless you made up for it with added additional exercises.

Exactly my point! If you have the time and dedication to spent 6 days, instead of 3 days a week in the gym. Why not do it?
I mean, there aren't any disadvantages, are there? I think, it comes down to the individual. If you prefer 3xweek, than do it. If you want 6xdays, fine as well. That's what I wanted to know!

Still, I'd like to get more opinions on this method. If that might be an option. And thanks to BenchPolkov if you read this here ;-)

[Pericu]

Thanks for starting this thread Pericu. This is a topic that greatly interests me.

I'm quite fond of the idea of training frequently. I train from home so training frequently and with shorter durations is something I much prefer from a lifestyle perspective. I find training frequently also helps keep me limber; when I take days off from the gym, especially a two day break, my muscles get sticky and my joints stiffen up very quickly. Lastly I think there is a good argument to be made about training as a metabolic stimulus. Training often helps maintain elevated protein synthesis levels and enhance insulin sensitivity; there is a ceiling to how much of a stimulating effect a single training session can have in this regard no matter how gruelling it is.

You bring up some valid points, which I totally agree with. Especially jointhealth and all that stuff improves, in my opinion. If you're interested in higher frequency trainging, I highly recommend the book by Matt Perrymen "Squat every day" It really digs deep into the effect of high frequency training, the neural effect, overtraining and all that stuff. Really a good book!

Very frequent training is something we see practiced in the world of powerlifting. Obviously there is the case of world class lifters coached by Sheiko himself who I have heard can train five, eight or even ten sessions per week (I'd love to have clarification on this if anyone has specific names and numbers). Some of Dietmar's athletes are reported to train with variations of the competition lifts almost everyday. Members of the Japanese, Taiwanese and Indonesian world teams seem to train the competition lifts daily and so on.

If we equate for volume, is more frequent training universally superior to less frequent training? If so, why don't we all just train daily?

For the majority of the lifters, we must not forget that elite is still elite and they need the high volume AND high frequency to make progress any longer. Many novices and intermediates forget about that and rush into high frequency programs such as the bulgarian method, without thinking about the long term progress. (but it doesn't seem like that you aren't aware of it. Just wanted to say it, because there might be some people reading this that aren't aware of that ;-))

That beeing said, not everyone wants to spent 6 days a week in the gym. I totally understand that, but I rather spread the workouts than doing 2-3 hour workouts 3xweek.

[BuccioniPL]

So, we're pretty much aligned on general things.

Focusing on your main point, my opinion is that spreading from 3 to 6 (for example) will change the metabolic effects. I mean stress-recovery.
I really do not know what is better and what not.
Istinctively I would say that shorter work-outs are better for focusing on technique, being more fresh, but overall response in terms of metabolism would be different.
I really do not know which is better in terms of overall perfmormance at the end of a preparatory + competitive period.
May you try this two options and then check it up?

[Pericu]

So, we're pretty much aligned on general things.

Focusing on your main point, my opinion is that spreading from 3 to 6 (for example) will change the metabolic effects. I mean stress-recovery.
I really do not know what is better and what not.
Istinctively I would say that shorter work-outs are better for focusing on technique, being more fresh, but overall response in terms of metabolism would be different.
I really do not know which is better in terms of overall perfmormance at the end of a preparatory + competitive period.
May you try this two options and then check it up?

True that! I too, think that there perhaps might be some advantages and disadvantages to both methods.
I'm trying to find a logical explanation on which method might be more benificial, but I simply can't without any proof. I think it would be so interesting to see some more studies on frequency in regards with all the different aspects, etc.

But, to get back to the topic.
I'd be happy to share information on this. As soon as I'd start a 6xweek modification, I could keep a detailed log about all the important aspects in that matter!

[Pericu]

Playing devil's advocate (as always), I come back to the point I made in my post above. This strategy makes sense insofar as we equate for volume. However, there may be more factors at play here than volume calculations alone, one of which is fatigue.

A thread over on the Reactive Training Systems forum got me thinking about this:

"Why does Reactive Training produce the best results working in the 9 RPE range and Sheiko produce solid resluts working in the 7-8 RPE range?"

The answer (as I hypothesis) is in fatigue.  In Reactive Training we try to get to our goal weight or percentage as quickly as possible and then work from there until eventually dropping off due to fatigue.  In Sheiko training the opposite effect is created.  The lifter pyramids up to his goal percentage so its alot like dropping off before you set your goal weight.  So by the time a Sheiko lifter reaches his goal percentage he is experiencing a similair level (there is probably a mathmatical way to estimate this) of fatigue to the RT lifter who has just dropped off.  Therefore the lifter actually feels as though he is in the 9 RPE range although if he were to look at the RPE chart he would be in the 7-8 range.

A benchpress triple at 75% is an entirely different beast than a benchpress triple at 75% performed after two singles at 85%, two doubles at 80%, a triple at 75%, a set of 4 reps at 70%, a set of 5 reps at 60% and a set of six reps at 50% ie. a marathon bench pyramid.

We could hold total weekly volume constant but arrange the sets and reps in ways that would induce quite different levels of fatigue. The question is: is fatigue, expressed as a rate of perceived excretion (RPE), actually involved in determining the training effect of a given stimulus? If so, then we have a new variable on our hands to consider, not just total weekly volume.

Totally legit to play devils advocate ;-)

Actually I know the thread and I'm pretty familiar with RTS (have got the book lying here) and as far as sheiko goes, Mike did a template on #37 with RPE's but mentiones, that this isn't actually a sheiko program but more of a hybrid.
If you use autoregulation on sheiko, you will get a totally different program and succesion of reps/sets. I'm a big fan of RTS but I'd be much to scared of touching upon sheiko+RTS without having total control over both of the programs.

I hope I did get it right. You mean, that the fatigue of the first Squat of the day will have an impact on the bench and by that will influence the progress? So, that if you would do the bench alone, you're CNS will be to fresh to get the intended stimulus? Is that what you're saying?

[Pericu]

Yes. I think the effect would be relatively minor in the above case (splitting the days but keeping the existing set and rep scheme) but would be much more pronounced if you were to more radically alter the distribution of volume. For example shuffle around the order of the sets within a single training session (zig zag instead of pyramid), shuffle around the order of sets between training sessions (dividing a single day of deadlifting across 6 training sessions), change the distribution of reps between sets (performing 80% for two sets of five reps instead of five doubles), change the distribution of reps between training sessions (perform all my sets of 50% for the week on Monday, all my sets of 60% for the week on Tuesday, all my sets of 70% for the week on Wednesday...).

These are the most extreme examples and I use them only for the purpose of demonstration. Obviously total volume expressed as tonnage (to factor in both number of lifts and intensity) is going to be the most fundamental training variable, but it is not the only training variable. There are limits to how far we can take it.

Ok, now I see!
I never intended to do it that way, but you're totally true! All the volume for 7 days in 1 Session would be as detrimental as splitting it over 7 days. The middle way would be the way to go, I agree.

But, as mentioned, I never intended to split it up like this. The Reps/Sets/% would be the same for the several days.
Ie. if week2, Day 1 calls for
Squat           5x50%, 4x60%, 3x70%, 2x4x80%
Bench press   5x50%, 4x60%, 3x70%, 2x5x80%
Squat           3x55%, 3x65%, 3x4x75%

I'd do instead;
Day 1
Squat           5x50%, 4x60%, 3x70%, 2x4x80%
Squat           3x55%, 3x65%, 3x4x75%
Day 2
Bench press   5x50%, 4x60%, 3x70%, 2x5x80%

So even if we would say that it perhaps has an effect, will that negatively affect the long term gains? Due to no one can give us a clear answer, I'd just guess; if it'll negatively affect the gains, it'll be a minor one. Especially if you think how we progress on Sheiko. If the weights feel light after a cycle, we increase the weight, so even if we wouldn't be pre-fatigued by a set before the (in this example) bench, in the long term we might handle a bit heavier weights because the last cycle felt to easy and in the end, get the same stimulus out if it as if we were pre-fatigued.

[Robert Frederick]

I don't think spreading those 3 days out into 6 will work that well. The first reason is that the magnitude of stress is lessened for each workout. Sure it's the same at the end of the week but not each day. Does acute stress vs chronic stress matter? I'd argue that it does. Think about how a boy going through puberty is transformed by an increase in testosterone. You could work it out and say that X grams of testosterone spread out over Y years leads to such and such virilization. Girls, with much less, don't show the same changes, just delayed until the total exposure is the same. In other words the concentration of loading is also important, not just the total load. If you go from a 3 day week with a medium, large, and small load to a 6 day week with small, small, medium, small, small, small, you never get the stimulation you get from the large loads in the 3 day/week schedule.

The second reason is that you are training more often but you are not training the main lifts any more frequently as set up in the original example.

The third reason is supposing you work it out so that you include small, medium, and large loads and that frequency of the main lifts increases, the total stress is now dramatically higher than it was as a 3 day program. This jump in stress can easily lead to overtraining and/or injuries if not prepared for it. Typically, the structure of a long-term plan sequentially introduces more effective training means as the effect of lesser training means wears off. This gets you accustomed to increased stress over time.

[Pericu]

I don't think spreading those 3 days out into 6 will work that well. The first reason is that the magnitude of stress is lessened for each workout. Sure it's the same at the end of the week but not each day. Does acute stress vs chronic stress matter? I'd argue that it does. Think about how a boy going through puberty is transformed by an increase in testosterone. You could work it out and say that X grams of testosterone spread out over Y years leads to such and such virilization. Girls, with much less, don't show the same changes, just delayed until the total exposure is the same. In other words the concentration of loading is also important, not just the total load. If you go from a 3 day week with a medium, large, and small load to a 6 day week with small, small, medium, small, small, small, you never get the stimulation you get from the large loads in the 3 day/week schedule.

The second reason is that you are training more often but you are not training the main lifts any more frequently as set up in the original example.

The third reason is supposing you work it out so that you include small, medium, and large loads and that frequency of the main lifts increases, the total stress is now dramatically higher than it was as a 3 day program. This jump in stress can easily lead to overtraining and/or injuries if not prepared for it. Typically, the structure of a long-term plan sequentially introduces more effective training means as the effect of lesser training means wears off. This gets you accustomed to increased stress over time.

Extremely interesting and thanks for sharing your thoughts.
I can't really argue against it, because this is a point why I wanted to hear your opinion on. Due to I never made any experience with it and due to we don't have any valuable research on this topic, we can simply just guess or have our opinions.
But really interesting question if the daily stress is the trigger for adaption or if it's the weekly dose (of course it's a bit of both, but which one is the main trigger might be interesting  to know!)

[Robert Frederick]

That's also an interesting question: which dose matters most - daily, weekly, or monthly? I think that depends on the type of adaptation being sought because our body tissues have different turnover times. Match them up for the best gains in each. For increases in tendon strength single large stresses are probably not good while the large metabolic stress you get from drop sets to failure are probably good for muscle hypertrophy. The same goes for the increase in cardiovascular fitness you get from HIIT vs slow and continuous.

[Pericu]

That's also an interesting question: which dose matters most - daily, weekly, or monthly? I think that depends on the type of adaptation being sought because our body tissues have different turnover times. Match them up for the best gains in each. For increases in tendon strength single large stresses are probably not good while the large metabolic stress you get from drop sets to failure are probably good for muscle hypertrophy. The same goes for the increase in cardiovascular fitness you get from HIIT vs slow and continuous.

This turned to such an interesting topic, so excited right now, hahaha!

The damn problem is, that even if an individual would try both approaches, it will always give different results. Even if one is better than the other, it could be that the individual was influenced by all the small issues we all know to well.

By the way. So if I don't have the possibility to change the daily loading because otherwise the intention of stress would be changed, the only solution for a 6 days workout would be to put the GPP on the days inbetween. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong! GPP work isn't counted on top of the NBL of the workouts. (If so, then one have to watch the recovery and see if the GPP doesn't interfere with the fitness of the next day)

[Robert Frederick]

We can't have interesting discussions without good questions. 

One thing Boris likes to do with the GPP is to stretch the muscles after working them out. It seems that doing so  increases IGF-1 secretion.

I guess what you could do to make it work though is to do some loaded stretches after you main sets and then do the GPP stuff on other days. You could probably even incorporate some bodybuilding methods during the GPP workouts.

That sounds decent. Try it out and let us know what happens.

[Pericu]

We can't have interesting discussions without good questions. 

One thing Boris likes to do with the GPP is to stretch the muscles after working them out. It seems that doing so  increases IGF-1 secretion.

I guess what you could do to make it work though is to do some loaded stretches after you main sets and then do the GPP stuff on other days. You could probably even incorporate some bodybuilding methods during the GPP workouts.

That sounds decent. Try it out and let us know what happens.

;-P

But really, seems like this forum offers a lot of information and even more, people with knowledge who doesn't withhold to share this knowledge. Seems like a good place to be ;-)

You could probably even incorporate some bodybuilding methods during the GPP workouts.

What exactly do you mean with it?

Thanks for the hints!