Do you agree with Firas Zahabi's flow training?

Dr. Aahhnold says:

05c30c7914e62487e43d2e46100d20db.jpg

Wasn't Arnold juiced to the gills?
 
Makes sense in theory. I’ve been on both ends of someone getting hurt while going 70% or something else below 100. Injuries and accidents happen, but maybe less so if you aren’t going so hard.
 
Who did train that way except him? All p4p best fighters have their own training methods and to say there is only one way to train should be proved by researches and stuff.
By the way it doesnt matter how u train when u are talented, just stay fit is enough (jones example).
Ur genes are only factor of ur perfomance
 
No. He knows enough to think he is right, but not enough to know that he is wrong.
 
Meanwhile, GSP"s bjj coach, John Danaher

"It is said that John would easily spend 12-14 hours a day at the gym working on his BJJ and his skills as a coach. Renzo is said to have said that John Danaher would spend Christmas Day on the mats if he were allowed."

danaher.jpg
 
according to him you can't assume fire will burn things tomorrow. I wouldn't trust him that much because of his rigid weird train of thought
 
Bullshit
So many researches over the years and this dude just thinks he is a fucking steve jobs.
As far as i remember
For str there is 3-5 reps of 80-90%1RM
For str endurance there is 15-20 reps 50-60%1RM
And etc
Fuck this touchbutt vol. 2 training
I love that you are mentioning peer reviewed, empirical data. Did you consider looking for research based on his methods to critically analyze? I found over a dozen studies in 2 minutes which (after skimming) appear to support correlation between improved performance and reduced intensity and duration of training. Here is a link to one which is easy to read, even though not the best example.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4562558/

We have the internet dude. We no longer have to take staunch positions on topics based on wild assumptions and confirmation bias. It takes like a minute to fact check anyhthing quickly before you make an idiot of yourself.
 
It’s becoming increasingly more common in sport science literature that frequency > volume as it allows your body more time to adapt and recover.
However going on a 2-3 mile run at the same pace every other day will do very little for you as there is no increase in intensity.
 
Dr. Aahhnold says:

05c30c7914e62487e43d2e46100d20db.jpg
Only madmen equate self-inflicted pain with success. You lose performance training sore and you instill bad habits not moving your best.

I think athletes don't train smart enough, most of the work is done by sham specialists who make you go through drills made for a group of people and not specific individual. The biggest work must be done by the individual seeing his own errors and trying to fix them at his own pace, not some wingmen shoving a simple down regime.
 
I love that you are mentioning peer reviewed, empirical data. Did you consider looking for research based on his methods to critically analyze? I found over a dozen studies in 2 minutes which (after skimming) appear to support correlation between improved performance and reduced intensity and duration of training. Here is a link to one which is easy to read, even though not the best example.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4562558/

We have the internet dude. We no longer have to take staunch positions on topics based on wild assumptions and confirmation bias. It takes like a minute to fact check anyhthing quickly before you make an idiot of yourself.
In interview he mentioned one dude, on which opinion he based on his training method.
And u are right,there is thousand researches.
So tell me why firas zahabi or wtf his name is thinks he found only way
 
A trainer has to implement a method he believes in, or the person he's training won't believe in it. If that happens he's doomed to failure.

That doesn't mean he's correct but he has to be confident in the path he's chosen, and flexible enough to choose another if he's proven incorrect.
 
I am old and work in the field, first as athlete and then as trainer for 30+ years... in general - excluding extreme overtraining / poor nutrition and sleep / super “hardgainer” genetics - most people will make maximum athletic gains the more frequently and intensely they train, simple. Go hard and go often is the general rule for substantial results, then of course there is an indispensable need for optimum periodisation, nutrition, sleep, etc ... as well as decent genetics.

As we age that changes slightly due to inevitable wear and tear, injuries, as well as health preservation and a much more “delicate” organism at 60 compared to 20, but the general rule for maximum performance gains actually stays the same in my opinion.
 
Ya, if you are gifted in all areas physical, mental, athletic and on roids, you can do whatever you want. Look at Jones.

If you are not perfect this is how you start to suck.
 
Bullshit
So many researches over the years and this dude just thinks he is a fucking steve jobs.
As far as i remember
For str there is 3-5 reps of 80-90%1RM
For str endurance there is 15-20 reps 50-60%1RM
And etc
Fuck this touchbutt vol. 2 training

I think he’s talking about sparring and drilling etc. Not lifting.
 
that was an interesting podcast


Firas is a pretty smart guy
 
The whole point is you don't have to kill yourself every training session. Training must be fun and enjoyable. He said some guys go all in 3 days in a week. Then the next day wakes up sore and unmotivated. You don't need to run 5 miles everyday. Instead you could run 2-3 miles everyday and repeat it whole year. He says hard training causes injury. In the end your overall training time will surpass hard trainers. You've trained more without damaging your body and it's good for your health, career in the long run.


Yes. Even in sports like powerlifting you can't max out or go for AMRAPs every session. 70-90% is the range most people should train.

Lower volume and raise intensity as the competition grows closer
 
Back
Top