I think it depends mainly on what your goals are.
If you’re a powerlifter, then perhaps it would make the most sense to alternate size/endurance phases with strength/speed phases. Of course you’d have to be sure to time your phases so that by the time you have a competition, you are about to peak on a strength phase. I think it would be overkill to focus exclusively on strength year round - would probably lead to burnout and/or injuries. However, if you’re trying to maintain a certain weight, you might want to be cautious with the hypertrophy phases.
On the other hand, if you’re a competitive bodybuilder, you might do something similar to the above, but make sure you are peaking on your hypertrophy phase when competition time arrives.
Now if you’re someone like me, who does neither of the above, but just wants to look good, it’s probably not a bad idea to focus on 3-4 different qualities at once.
If you do 10 sets of 3 with 80-85% of 1RM (as used in C.W.'s ABBH and WAterbury Method), you’ll be improving both strength and size. And the 2nd or 3rd time you work that muscle per week, you can throw in a lighter workout for speed or endurance. I know from personal experience that you can successfully train for multiple strength qualities at once (at least 3), and I would imagine that most of the people who follow C.W.'s recent programs would agree.
[quote]Paul0 wrote:
How many different types of ‘strength’ do you guys think can be worked in a cycle/phase of periodization?
i think it’s best to emphasize one type of training <i.e. maximum strength: 90%+ loads for very low reps, low-medium volume, accelerate the weight as fast as possible on the concentric> per phase <i.e. 2-6 weeks>.
but programs like westside work both maximum strength and speed, and to a lesser extent, hypertrophy all at the same time.
what do you think? think it’s worthwhile to do a cycle where you’re training maximum strength, maximum speed, hypertrophy AND endurance? or do you think it’s better to dedicate phases to each of these aspects individually? [/quote]