T Nation

The Terminology of Training


#1

Hey,
I've noticed there's quite a bit of difference in the terminology from coach to coach. Like for instance volume is defined by some as the total workload for a movement (setsXrepsXweight), by others as total reps for a movement(Setsxreps), or by others the total amount of exercises for a given bodypart or training session. Another absolutely atrocious example is periodization. For instance some would define this as periodization:
Week1: 5x3 @ 80%
Week2: 5x3 @ 85%
Week3: 5x2 @ 90%
etc.
I define it as a progression scheme or a planed progression (how you're going to progress week after week etc.) and not periodization. Periodization to me is dividing a training period with a beginning and end date in time blocks. The whole period is a macrocycle, the macrocycle is divided in mesocycles, each mesocycle contains several macrocycles (training weeks) and each microcycle contains several training sessions. And periodization is a planed change in the parts of a program(intensity, volume, frequency, specificity etc.) within these units of time in order to achieve different training objectives. Like for instance linear periodization has changes in volume and intensity from mesocycle to mesocycle starts with low intensity/high volume and progresses to low volume/high intensity, whereas dup has changes in volume/intensity from session to session.There are other examples.
Why isn't there an established meaning for these different terms. What do you think?


#2

Because ultimately it is just lifting weights, which is something meatheads have done for decades without much need for science or vocab.


#3

Yeah, but there is always people saying you can't get strong without periodization, for instance, and then you go and research what the hell exactly periodization is and you get so confused, you want to bang your head on your desk :smiley:


#4

Hey, I'll tell you a secret. You can get strong training like a bodybuilder.

Boom!


#5

Those people are silly.


#6

I've never seen people talking about both weightXsetXreps and setsXreps as training volume. Amount of sets and reps has always been training volume and weight included, total volume in my books.

In the end, it doesn't really even matter. As long as both people and coaches make it clear what they are talking about, little technical fuckalities like that don't really matter.


#7

If I wanted to nerd out, I guess my training plan could be called: Hybridized, conjugated, cybernetic, concurrent, undulating, block periodization.

But I don't because it doesn't help me or anyone in any way. Btw, that's fancy for Westside BB style training ha!

Now if I was asking for critiques on my program and told people the what I put in the post first, I probably wouldn't get many replies. But if I tell people it's westside style, I'm going to get a lot more help. Just saying Westside conveys and communicates my meaning much more effectively.

Now when I post something, I try to KISS and add qualifiers if it's necessary in a way that's as plain as possible. Really, that's a good way to do it regardless of the subject.

Even in grad school, I would frequently do better than people with higher GRE's that did much better on tests when it came to scientific reports and presentations because I was concise, to the point, and only broke out the big words and technical vocabulary when absolutely necessary. If I wanted, I could make my writing highfalutin, unnecessarily complicated, and take a lot of space. But that helps no one.

This also led to me having shorter presentations and reports which classmates would see as 'uh oh, he's not gonna do well' whereas the professors saw it as clear and concise communication.

I remember this one pompous ass of a teaching assistant who would try to get all fancy with lab questions he wrote out and sometimes all this did was make the question not the question he meant, but something different. He hated when I asked for clarification because I could pinpoint exactly why the question was unclear and what different meanings could be taken from it. And he hated that because he couldn't stand a student pointing something out wrong, granted I tried to do this discretely. Then one day, he tried to call me lazy by saying I just didn't understand because I didn't read the lab before hand without even hearing want I needed clarification on. I went off on him. In a very professional, clear, and concise way of course. Ultimately, he had to leave the room because he had clearly embarrassed himself.

If he kept his communication simple, clear, and concise, the issue never would have arisen. I mean, do you really need end your paragraphs with "In toto" or replace therefore with "ergo" every time? Gimme a break.

Words and terms are only so useful in that they help you understand something.

Also, when you read these terms you've got to take in the context that there written. Like who wrote them, what subject are they dealing with, when it was written, and where it was written.


#8

Why do Brits call push-ups "press-ups"?

Why do some people call pressdowns "pushdowns"?

Why do some lifters record their training Weight x Reps x Sets?

Why does this thread remind me of the time I got trolled and ran around in circles explaining what volume and intensity meant?


#9

Why is it every time I buy something expensive for my cats they would rather play with the fucking box it came in?


#10

There is. It is just trade specific.


#11

Why do some people call it a "strict overhead" press...and others call it a "push press"?


#12

For what it is worth, I feel like I was being trolled in that thread.
And, it kinda seems like you are trolling right here.

I guarantee, if the shoes were reversed, and I was the forum director and you were 'just some dude' you would have been posted out of that thread. But, the invention of the internet has definitely shown to people who pay attention how many sheep are out there. And there are a shit load


#13

You would fall down a lot.


#14

Haha. That was pretty good.


#15

Aren't those two different exercises? Push press uses leg drive, strict doesn't.


#16

Yeah, it was a reference to the forum director of this site posting a video of himself doing a "strict overhead press" when he actually did a push press