T Nation

PAP and Power Dilemma


#1

Hi everybody

I'm new to this forum. I've read a lot those last 6 months about strength and power training, but i came to a fork in the understanding of what it is, what it's not and what it's maybe. Talking about the development of strength-power or power-strength i don't know exactly, this article from NSCA Journal suggest using a combination of different percentage in the loads, upon an experimental training which reveal that a set made by 4-5 reps @ 30%, very little rest then 4-5 reps @ 60%, a bit of a rest again and some maximum isometric contractions leads to a significative grow in both strength and power.

Here's the article:
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=effect%20of%20multiple-load%20training%20in%20the%20force-velocity%20relationship&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDUQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.setantacollege.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2FJournal_db%2FEFFECT%2520OF%2520MULTIPLE-LOAD%2520TRAINING%2520ON%2520THE%2520FORCE-VELOCITY%2520RELATIONSHIP.pdf&ei=mWAFUZHBDeGo4ASis4Aw&usg=AFQjCNEUseBRnn-lQe_-GsfsEbektyi2Mw
But talking about contrast and complex training, it is suggested to use a combination of light and heavy loads as well but the pattern is totally different, cause in this method they use few reps at heavy resistance to stimulate the CNS and lead to a PAP effect, and then going for the light weights. In a study conducted on athletic population they made a group training with alternation of heavy and light resistance and the other group doing all the heavy sets first (3 or 4 sets @ 85% at least) and then 3-4 sets @ 30%. What came out was that the first group did increase in strength and power, thanks to the PAP effect, but the other one had no increases or decreases in some cases, probably due to the fatigue given by the 3-4 sets of heavy weight training.

In a third option, they call it mixed method or something, it's suggested to do some sets at light resistance before, as a sort of warm-up and only after the completion of all the light sets, doin the heavy.

Ok, at this point i'm a bit confused. All those three ideas work and it's just a matter of taste and personal believes in doing this or that, or maybe they produce totally different results?

Can someone enlighten my obscure, confused mind?

Thanks


#2

What are your goals and what are your strength numbers?


#3

As much fun as reading research journal articles is, I suggest you actually just work on lifting weights 4-5 times a week very hard, and do some sort of conditioning or cardio work on the side. People seriously misunderstand exactly what portion of research articles in all fields turn out to be completely speculative, or completely wrong when the truth is eventually decided. Research is the process of a blind man walking up and down alleys over and over until he finds one that leads him through to the house. I’m saying this as a research trained graduate degree holder. Reading research only will leave you with almost no ability to focus. Analysis paralysis.

Do work.


#4

I train 3 times/week but i cannot go as far as 4-5 times as suggested by Aragorn. The idea is to build power along with strength, cause i was doing shot put almost 10 years ago and i started to practice again in those last 3 months. For now i just want to get back to that as a enthusiast, so i need to capitalize my training days, that’s why i asked.
My number are not definitively high for a shot putter even as a amateur:

Bench Press: 105 kg
Full back squat: 130 kg
Snatch: 75 kg

So my goal is to increase maximal strength along with power and i found out the mixed method idea. The clue is understanding if it is better to start with some sets at low and moderate resistance and then going for the heavy ones or alternating high and low, sets by sets.

What do you think according to your experience?


#5

[quote]nerasezi wrote:
I train 3 times/week but i cannot go as far as 4-5 times as suggested by Aragorn. The idea is to build power along with strength, cause i was doing shot put almost 10 years ago and i started to practice again in those last 3 months. For now i just want to get back to that as a enthusiast, so i need to capitalize my training days, that’s why i asked.
My number are not definitively high for a shot putter even as a amateur:

Bench Press: 105 kg
Full back squat: 130 kg
Snatch: 75 kg

So my goal is to increase maximal strength along with power and i found out the mixed method idea. The clue is understanding if it is better to start with some sets at low and moderate resistance and then going for the heavy ones or alternating high and low, sets by sets.

What do you think according to your experience?[/quote]

This seems to be a trend (note: not a fad!) in both strength training and body building these days. Working in a multitude of rep and intensity ranges for a given movement/muscle group. When it comes to power many will tell you that using a bracketed system tends to lead to strong power development.

ex of a bracket:
Train with a shotput ball weighing less than 16.01 lbs. Then train with a ball weighing more than 16.01 lbs. This (theoretically) would allow you to work on both speed and maximal force generation in order to develop power (P = force x velocity).

As for your question: most would say that the difference between steadily increasing the weight and going for an alternating high/low approach would be marginal. One study with one group of subjects is NOT definitive.

Working with less than maximal weights does tend to increase power output. But working with close to maximal weights increases force generation. Ideally you want a heathly mix of both. ( http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/archive/2/22/20110314025746!Muscle_Force_Velocity_relationship.png )

Aragorn said something VERY insightful: Analysis paralysis. I know you want to get the best bang for your buck when you train, but sitting around worried about the small details will get you nowhere. Don’t over think it. If you want to be a shot-put enthusiast, just get out there and have some fun!


#6

I wouldn’t worry about using high force to high velocity type PAP as of yet. I’d suggest getting stronger still. Perhaps switch off between strength and power work while still doing technique type stuff.

Edit: When I say strength work and power work, I meant phases.


#7

Three times a week is much better than no times a week, so do what you can. It’s perfectly fine to want to research, I’m a bit of a whore myself, and I definitely understand you wanting to get the most out of your training sessions. We all do. I was mostly responding to the implied tone of the original post that seemed to be asking about details not needed to get the most out of power training–trying to mimic the loads of the study would likely lead to less improvement than doing other programming given by coaches rather than laboratory data gatherers :).

There is a level of detail which you simply do not need at most beginning and intermediate levels in training.


#8

“Subjects
The subjects were 21 male college students aged 21?24
years who had not exercised regularly for at least 1 year
before the start of this study. The physical characteristics
of the subjects in each group are shown in Table 1. This
study was approved by our College Ethics Committee”
Spliting 21 subjects in 3 groups is just irrelevant. We need 300 subjects so the results have no meaning. It was done over 8 years ago so if it was important others wrote about the subject.

To get results i train heavy in the gym(3-7 reps) and i train light at home, 8-16 reps. bodyweight/dumbells.
Watching TV each commercial can be pushups, abs, lunges, calves, etc…
Home training can be 6-7 days weekly, just nibling minutes here and there.
Just my 0.02