How Much Is Enough?

When I used to train athletes for a living I used to ask this question because from a volume comparison my training programs never looked like the ones recommended by the NSCA and other such organizations. I never had my athletes perform 100-150 ground contacts of "plyos," and the strength exercises were used on an "as needed" basis, meaning, I stuck with the basics unless a change was needed and then modified accordingly. It's interesting to watch the pendulum swing back this way in the fitness industry, and to a certain extent, the S&C industry of almost a decade of influence by well-meaning but misinformed and misapplying functional training gurus and rehab specialists. Back are the heavy compound lifts. Gone or dying is the prescription for unstable surfaces to "enhance proprioception."

Why is this?

Because, as my friend Zachariah Salazar says, "More is always more." There's only so much the body can adapt to and if there is too much "thrown at it," (nice scientific phrase, huh?) it won't adapt much at all and progress stalls.

The bottom line is everything we do in the gym and on the athletic field is a skill. If there are similarities between exercises, than skills are easier to obtain.

How are skills obtained?

By analyzing movement and practicing those movements...perfectly.

Intuitively we all know this, or at least we should. I vividly remember teaching the volleyball team my last year at RU how to land. That's right, land. They'd been taught how to jump, but never how to land. Most of them allowed their bodies to pitch forward at the net when blocking--especially the taller girls. So we focused on high quality landing mechanics from boxes of varying heights. Upon asking the girls if they'd ever been taught to land, everyone of them said "no." So how did learning how to land make a difference for them? They were able to land, load, and re-block/re-jump quicker. In science-speak, the amoritization phase of the stretch-shortening cycle decreased because they were no longer fighting their own bodies from pitching forward.

The same thing should be true with weight training. My good friend Brett Jones is on track to break into the Raw Elite ranks of Powerlifting. How's he train? Primarily with the squat, bench, and deadlift. The same is true for many elite weightlifters. They train the snatch, the clean, the jerk, and the front squat. My greatest success as a weightlifter was when I trained using a minimalist approach: pulls, jerks, squats, full lifts on Saturdays. I practiced the movements a lot. Then with heavier loads. A lot. Why did I change? Because I ran out of mobility.

I think that's why concepts like the Conjugate Method work well for some but not for others. If you run out of mobility in primary exercises, you have to find similar exercises that have "carryover." Why did the Bulgarians start beating the Russians in Weightlifting? Essays have been written about this and the debate will never surely die, but to a certain extent, the Bulgarians perfected the classic lifts and used others sparingly. This gets into varying aspects of sports science which are too in depth for this post, but on some fundamental level we all know that the best in every sport have the basics mastered: movement/technique/strategy. How much could Michael Jordan snatch or squat in his prime? Who cares?! All this of course is just my pontification/theory based on my experience, reflection, and study. Bottom line though is this: If we fail to use it, we lose it. Once it's gone, it's hard to get back--regardless of the "it."

So all this begs a question: How much is enough?

Just enough.

And unfortunately, that's dependent upon the individual at hand.

For the [almost] Elite Powerlifter, it may be [re]acquiring foot, ankle and hip mobility.

For the young field athlete, it may be keeping the mobility he already has and loading specific movements like lunges and jumps.

But the prescription is simple, I just wished I had learned it sooner: Learn how to move in all planes of motion.

This is more than multi-planar lunging as prescribed by some coaches. Or with adding a reach by others. It's learning how to move all your joints in full ranges of motion and then integrating those motions. Then, and only then, load them. I wish somebody'd told me this 15 years ago--not that I'd probably listen...

I'm doing this with my squat right now. My body won't let me load the squat right now, so every squat I do with just my bodyweight, I try to make it feel the same--exactly the same. Not similar, exactly. So when I can get back to loading, my body knows the pattern--exactly.

Quality is key. Not quantity. It's better, meaning reaping more results focusing on doing things well regardless of the prescribed rep ranges. Alfonso taught me to use these as a guide--"Do no more than x reps..." That sort of thing.

When quality breaks, stop. Stop when you are in pain. Stop when you start changing your breathing pattern (not frequency...). Stop when your posture starts to break down. Just stop. Move on to something else--another exercise, mobility work, recovery work, home...

Why am I posting all this?

Because I never stopped.

I'd be on my feet 16 hours a day having had 5 hours of sleep the previous night and then go snatch 80% on iron in a commercial gym, then back squat 90%. It's easy to keep going at 24, 25, 26. Not so much 10 years after that. It's easy to "put a hurt" on young athletes. Go back and visit them 10 years after you've worked with them. If you did your job, they'll be moving better and probably in better shape. If not, they'll look like me--broken and trying to regain lost ground, clinging to a glimmer of hope. If I weren't so darn stubborn, I would've given up two years ago.

Rif (Pavel?) is right--glory is temporary, pain is forever.

Once you dig yourself that hole, it's hard (but not impossible) to dig out.

Pay attention now and save your future.