0
comments
Sorry about the assumption. I was referring to S.A.I.D. - specific
adapation (to) imposed demands. It means that your body adapts
specifically to the demands imposed upon it. If you do a 20 rep squat to
refusal (failure is such a vague term - I prefer Zatsiorsky's term
'refusal') you will get good at 20 reps squats.
If you are a powerlifter getting good at a 20 rep squat (specifically
working strength/endurance) won't be anywhere near as effective as doing
1 rep squats.
As for targeting only strength - I hope I didn't say that or give that
impression. You can think (using Dr. Siff's Supertraining model here) of
training in specific motor skills having an effect on speed, strength
and endurance. If you draw a triangular shape and label one side
'speed', another 'strength' and the third 'endurance' most training
would fit somewhere in this triangle. For example, a marathon runner
needs speed, strength and most importantly, endurance. Since endurance
is the predominant factor they woud compromise their ability to produce
'strength' and to some degree, speed.
Doing a HIT set to refusal really needs to be defined. I often do near
maximal snatches, for example. I do a weight large enough that I can
only do 1 repetition. I'm basically doing the set to 'failure' or
refusal in that I couldn't do a second repetition. Am I training HIT
style? Of course, I normally do 3-10 sets of 1-3 reps and may do more
than one workout per day 4-6 days per week, so I'm not training what I
think of as HIT. I was assuming that HIT referred to doing low set
(generally 1-2 per exercise and 10-20 total sets per workout), moderate
repetition (generally 6-20 reps per set with some reps possibly done as
either drop weights or with assistance). In my assumed protocol the
principle would suggest that the person training in such a way would
adapt to higher reps. Note their 1RM strength would also increase, just
as my 20RM strength increases if I increase my 1RM. But their 1RM
strength would not increase as much as if they were training
specifically to increase 1RM. They have increased what might be called
'strength/endurance
absolute strength more.
I hope this is clear. I apologize for the assumptions I may have made.
Rob Barrese wrote:
> Keith could you please describe the "principle of specific
> adaptation?" Are you referring to the principle of motor specificity?
> Meaning the exercise must be the same as the skill? I am confused as
> to how high intensity style training could only target endurance and
> not strength? It was mentioned in this forum that HIT proponents are
> using heavy loads (realitive to the individual) to "fatigue" then how
> would this not be strength building?
>
> Please explain further, thank you.
>
> Rob Barrese
> Pennsylvania, USA
>
--
Keith Hobman
Saskatoon, CANADA
http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
Sign all letters with full name & city of residence if you
wish them to be published!
Earn your degree in as few as 2 years - Advance your career with an AS, BS, MS degree - College-Finder.net.
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
March
0 comments: