General Training Overview - Intensity

[Robert Frederick]

The concept of relative intensity and the multible ways the program it makes perfectly good sense. However, how should one program the top intensity from day to day and week to week, relative to NL?

To me, it would make sense to program the higher intensities in weeks containing the lower NL and the lower intensities at weeks containing higher NL. What is coach Sheiko's recommendation?

That's the general idea.

[TheDane]

Okay thanks you - i guess the specifik details are a matter of trial and error or perhabs reading Sheikos book in due time.

[Robert Frederick]

You see the weekly alternation of emphasis on either volume or intensity in the chart above while the other gets a break. That's the basic idea. You can't just keep doing the same thing all the time. At the same time though you need a stable stimulus, which presents a bit of a paradox: the simultaneous need for a variable yet stable stimulus. It gets a bit complicated to apply so I just let Boris work it all out.

[TheDane]

Of course, it makes perfectly good sense that intensity has to fit the number of lifts and the other way around to apply sufficient stimulus without overreaching. Does Coach Sheiko have or wish to publish some guidelines on what level of intensity is appropriate to use with any given NL?

The concept of average intensity has a great appeal to me, and I understand the basic idea of periodization of NL and intensity during a cykle. However, I'm still curious about how what maximum intensity is appropriate for, lets say the squat, during a low NL/higher intensity, high NL/lower intensity week during a preparatory and competition cycle.

How would you handle f.eks 4 squatsessions/week(2xcompetition squat + 2xvariation) with regards to NL and intensity for either high NL/lower intensity or lower NL/higer intensity?

I'm sorry if it's too specific.

[Robert Frederick]

We use average weight lifted not average intensity. One is a measure of absolute stress and the other is relative stress. Average weight lifted has the highest correlation with your total so that is the more interesting number. Of course if your maxes are all 100 then absolute = relative.

Take a look at this.

http://sheiko-program.ru/forum/index.php?topic=311.msg1515#msg1515

You really can't say with certainty what is appropriate for any one person. You can give suggestions and start from there. Then you see how things go and adjust accordingly.

As a starting point for your squat example you could make one session intense and the other volumetric. Do the variations with control. So not too heavy and not too much volume.

[danjh2705]

Just a quick question on the Height-weight ratio chart listed.

I realize that this serves as a long term goal, but can I assume that this is for "natural" athletes?

[Robert Frederick]

Just a quick question on the Height-weight ratio chart listed.

I realize that this serves as a long term goal, but can I assume that this is for "natural" athletes?

Yes, natural.

Check out this calculator:
http://www.weightrainer.net/bodypred.html

The heights-weights shouldn't be too far off. I plugged in 13% fat and mine was right on.

[danjh2705]

Just a quick question on the Height-weight ratio chart listed.

I realize that this serves as a long term goal, but can I assume that this is for "natural" athletes?

Yes, natural.

Check out this calculator:
http://www.weightrainer.net/bodypred.html

The heights-weights shouldn't be too far off. I plugged in 13% fat and mine was right on.

Thanks Robert, that's what I thought .

[Petarosus18]

Hello,
I remember I was reading old book from Boris, and he mentioned hardcore pyramid performed by Alexey Sivokon reaching 90% intensity and 120 lifts. He said that was the most extreme pyramid he prescribed. What exactly it looked like? Thanks

[Bankmeister]

How many percent of the total lifts is usually spent in each intensity zone?

50-60%?
(60)-70%?
(70)-80%?
(80)-90%?
(90)+-?

[RussianBear]

How many percent of the total lifts is usually spent in each intensity zone?

50-60%?
(60)-70%?
(70)-80%?
(80)-90%?
(90)+-?

Hallo there!

I think this is varying from session to session - but with the average intensity being around 70 ish % as prescribed in the first post of the thread. I think that the average intensity is whats matters and not the percentage.

But usually it looks like (for me, an example)
5x50%
4x60%
3x2x70%
2x5x80%

Avg int.: 68.4%

This implies that 20% of my work-sets are at 50, 16% at 60%, 25% in the range of 70% and the rest (40%) at higher intensities.

Changing it to:
5x50% = 16%
4x60% = 14 %
3x2x70% = 20%
3x5x80% = 50%

Avg int.: 70.3%

You can continue changing the approach...

Regards
/Daniel

[Bankmeister]

Thanks!

Maybe my question was a little vague. I meant over a longer period like say 1 month or even a year. As you can see from the examples in the original post and your examples that the average intensity could land around 70% from a big range of possibilities. In weightlifting you could find some good statistics of how much they they spent i each zone.

For example in the book "Managing the training of weightlifters" the loads in the snatch are distributed like this:

Up to 55%: 0,83%
55%: 0,0%
60%: 4,08%
65%: 6,19%
70%: 11,7%
75%: 11,7%
80%: 14,5%
85%: 22,9%
90%: 16,7%
95%: 8,9%
100%: 2,5%

These were the loads for a pre-comp month cycle with data from 780 cases.

So it's something like this I'm asking for which is much more detailed. The user Sheiko37 had a good post regarding this:

I want to understand this better, I feel like average intensity would be the result of well organised training and not the goal. If for example the first day of #37 (over 80kg) squat average intensity is 65%, alternatively I could do the format below.

%RM      Reps      Sets
90      1      5
60      10    3

The average intensity is about the same but clearly it's a different workout and poorly structured.

You could do however many sets and reps you like in the 80-90% range which would blow out your average intensity, but then you could just include a low of intensity sets to offset that and bring the average back to 69.5-72%, surely more is considered when creating the set and rep scheme for a workout.

[RussianBear]

Thanks!

Maybe my question was a little vague. I meant over a longer period like say 1 month or even a year. As you can see from the examples in the original post and your examples that the average intensity could land around 70% from a big range of possibilities. In weightlifting you could find some good statistics of how much they they spent i each zone.

For example in the book "Managing the training of weightlifters" the loads in the snatch are distributed like this:

Up to 55%: 0,83%
55%: 0,0%
60%: 4,08%
65%: 6,19%
70%: 11,7%
75%: 11,7%
80%: 14,5%
85%: 22,9%
90%: 16,7%
95%: 8,9%
100%: 2,5%

These were the loads for a pre-comp month cycle with data from 780 cases.

So it's something like this I'm asking for which is much more detailed. The user Sheiko37 had a good post regarding this:

I want to understand this better, I feel like average intensity would be the result of well organised training and not the goal. If for example the first day of #37 (over 80kg) squat average intensity is 65%, alternatively I could do the format below.

%RM      Reps      Sets
90      1      5
60      10    3

The average intensity is about the same but clearly it's a different workout and poorly structured.

You could do however many sets and reps you like in the 80-90% range which would blow out your average intensity, but then you could just include a low of intensity sets to offset that and bring the average back to 69.5-72%, surely more is considered when creating the set and rep scheme for a workout.

I don't think your question was vague but I unfortunately believe that Boris himselfs needs to answer that. As pointed out we need a couple of cases (a lot, as in the example) to be sure.

May I ask why you are interested?

[Bankmeister]

Thanks!

Maybe my question was a little vague. I meant over a longer period like say 1 month or even a year. As you can see from the examples in the original post and your examples that the average intensity could land around 70% from a big range of possibilities. In weightlifting you could find some good statistics of how much they they spent i each zone.

For example in the book "Managing the training of weightlifters" the loads in the snatch are distributed like this:

Up to 55%: 0,83%
55%: 0,0%
60%: 4,08%
65%: 6,19%
70%: 11,7%
75%: 11,7%
80%: 14,5%
85%: 22,9%
90%: 16,7%
95%: 8,9%
100%: 2,5%

These were the loads for a pre-comp month cycle with data from 780 cases.

So it's something like this I'm asking for which is much more detailed. The user Sheiko37 had a good post regarding this:

I want to understand this better, I feel like average intensity would be the result of well organised training and not the goal. If for example the first day of #37 (over 80kg) squat average intensity is 65%, alternatively I could do the format below.

%RM      Reps      Sets
90      1      5
60      10    3

The average intensity is about the same but clearly it's a different workout and poorly structured.

You could do however many sets and reps you like in the 80-90% range which would blow out your average intensity, but then you could just include a low of intensity sets to offset that and bring the average back to 69.5-72%, surely more is considered when creating the set and rep scheme for a workout.

I don't think your question was vague but I unfortunately believe that Boris himselfs needs to answer that. As pointed out we need a couple of cases (a lot, as in the example) to be sure.

May I ask why you are interested?

Yes I also think that he might have to answer this himself. But I hoped that maybe someone who has been taught by him or read any of his books might know an answer to this.

I'm interested because this gives me a lot of information about how to distribute my reps during a training cycle. If I only have the total number of reps and the average intensity that doesn't say so much about how the training could/should be structured. It would be really interesting too see how Boris plan the loads compared to the weightlifters and other powerlifters for example.