Sporti
> "choc raczje zamiast w kierunku zwiekszania intensywanosci
> - patrz wyzej - szukalbym sposobu wydluzenia czasu z jakim
> obciazenie dziala na miesien"
>
> tzn. lepiej zacząć próbować utrzymać stałą objętość treningu
> (poprzez dodawanie kolejnych serii z treningu na trening) niż
> stosować LS, SS ?
Dzialanie LS jest porownywane z dodaniem "normalnej" serii, ale z ta roznica, ze LS powoduje znacznie wieksze mikrourazy niz "normalna seria". Dodatkowo dodana "normalna seria" moze natomiast - zwlaszcza przy obciazeniu wyzszym niz 80%-90% 5RM spowodowac problemy z CUN ("przetrenowanie"). Tak wiec ja osobiscie polecalbym jednak LS.
SS dzialaja inaczej, to znaczy nie powoduja mikrourazow, lecz powoduje "metabolic stress", ktory tez powoduje powiekszona hypertrofie.
Tak wiec obie techniki (LS i SS) sa cennym uzupelnieniem w zaawansowanym treningu HST.
Z drugiej strony nalezy je traktowac jako "dodatek".
Tu cytat:
4.2 Increasing Metabolic Stress vs. Increasing Mechanical Strain
But, the question remains: should you spend your extra time working on burn sets, or should you be trying to add another set of incline flies?
4.2.1 Extra metabolic work (esp. failure) can fry your neuromuscular junction and ECC system. This decreases the ability to excite the muscle to contract, but it also decreases your general ability to produce neural drive. However, most of us are good at managing this kind of fatigue now, and you can help things by replenishing glycogen and sleeping more. Moreover, this tends to be more skill-specific. Even if you fried out on dips, you can still manage on the incline press. If you did breathing squats, you can still muster enough to do leg extensions.
4.2.2 Extra mechanical strain, i.e. muscle damage by eccentric strain, decouples the ECC system quickly. The difference is that though you can muster the neural drive, you immediately find your muscle unresponsive. This transcends specific movements too. If you did negatives on flies, with little metabolic fatigue, than tried to do a normal bench, that bench will be suddenly very hard. To compensate, you would increase neural drive, which leads to step 1. Therefore, in my opinion, increasing strain -- though it will directly stimulate sarcomere hypertrophy -- has much higher risk for causing problems with progressive loading with 3x-a-week or higher frequency. In a sense, it becomes an issue of descending risk. If you want to bring up a bodypart, you increase strain on it. Once you've designed your work to increase strain, you have to review your training experience and consider whether adding more strain (by adding more sets, increasing stretch, using a modality) will cause problems with completing the next workout. If you think this could be a problem, then you look at increasing metabolic work. Once you've done this, then you finally look at how many sets you want to add to all of your exercises to bring up the bottom line effect.
Zmieniony przez - Sporti w dniu 2005-10-07 10:51:05
> - patrz wyzej - szukalbym sposobu wydluzenia czasu z jakim
> obciazenie dziala na miesien"
>
> tzn. lepiej zacząć próbować utrzymać stałą objętość treningu
> (poprzez dodawanie kolejnych serii z treningu na trening) niż
> stosować LS, SS ?
Dzialanie LS jest porownywane z dodaniem "normalnej" serii, ale z ta roznica, ze LS powoduje znacznie wieksze mikrourazy niz "normalna seria". Dodatkowo dodana "normalna seria" moze natomiast - zwlaszcza przy obciazeniu wyzszym niz 80%-90% 5RM spowodowac problemy z CUN ("przetrenowanie"). Tak wiec ja osobiscie polecalbym jednak LS.
SS dzialaja inaczej, to znaczy nie powoduja mikrourazow, lecz powoduje "metabolic stress", ktory tez powoduje powiekszona hypertrofie.
Tak wiec obie techniki (LS i SS) sa cennym uzupelnieniem w zaawansowanym treningu HST.
Z drugiej strony nalezy je traktowac jako "dodatek".
Tu cytat:
4.2 Increasing Metabolic Stress vs. Increasing Mechanical Strain
But, the question remains: should you spend your extra time working on burn sets, or should you be trying to add another set of incline flies?
4.2.1 Extra metabolic work (esp. failure) can fry your neuromuscular junction and ECC system. This decreases the ability to excite the muscle to contract, but it also decreases your general ability to produce neural drive. However, most of us are good at managing this kind of fatigue now, and you can help things by replenishing glycogen and sleeping more. Moreover, this tends to be more skill-specific. Even if you fried out on dips, you can still manage on the incline press. If you did breathing squats, you can still muster enough to do leg extensions.
4.2.2 Extra mechanical strain, i.e. muscle damage by eccentric strain, decouples the ECC system quickly. The difference is that though you can muster the neural drive, you immediately find your muscle unresponsive. This transcends specific movements too. If you did negatives on flies, with little metabolic fatigue, than tried to do a normal bench, that bench will be suddenly very hard. To compensate, you would increase neural drive, which leads to step 1. Therefore, in my opinion, increasing strain -- though it will directly stimulate sarcomere hypertrophy -- has much higher risk for causing problems with progressive loading with 3x-a-week or higher frequency. In a sense, it becomes an issue of descending risk. If you want to bring up a bodypart, you increase strain on it. Once you've designed your work to increase strain, you have to review your training experience and consider whether adding more strain (by adding more sets, increasing stretch, using a modality) will cause problems with completing the next workout. If you think this could be a problem, then you look at increasing metabolic work. Once you've done this, then you finally look at how many sets you want to add to all of your exercises to bring up the bottom line effect.
Zmieniony przez - Sporti w dniu 2005-10-07 10:51:05
HST is not about sets and reps, it is about getting people to change the way they think about training for size - Bryan Haycock
Biniu
efit
