Bill Roberts wrote:
Whether a set kicks one’s ass or not depends more on mindset, will, and planning than on any “intensification method” being added.
If anything, intensification methods are often in practice anything but.
If you know that after completing what one might call the straight reps – the initial series of reps done the ordinary way – that there is ALSO going to be X or X, Y, and Z done within seconds after that, this tends to reduce drive in the straight sets. Rather similarly to the argument HIT’ers make against doing a large number of sets per workout, that if one is going to do that, this holds back “intensity” on the individual sets because the body or brain knows that a great deal more work is coming and therefore more has to be kept in reserve.
I’m not saying “intensification methods” are always counterproductive, not so, but also they are not the be-all and end-all and if you can’t kick your ass without them, the problem is not lack of these methods.
This is what I’m recieving from most posters… So basically, focus on making each set and rep more intense?
Yes, focus that intensity on doing more each time…what you listed are intensity TECHNIQUES, but don’t think you have to be using an intensity technique to be intense.
There are generally 3 components to training- intensity, volume and frequency. How you mix these features is a key to programming. Typically, the volume and frequency components figure most prominently in beginner/intemediate programs. Intensity make take precedence when you are advanced. I’m not saying don’t train hard or intense, but you don’t need to utilize those techniques if you aren’t moving a lot of poundage (they are used usually because the trainee “has no more worlds to conquer” and must do more to really stimulate new growth). Just beating the log book should be intensity enough for now.
Just my 0.02.