Why Pudz and Marunde are onto something with better conditioning:

Sinister

Sinister

Doctor of Doom
Staff member
Senior Moderator
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
52,623
Reaction score
28,108
As many of you might have noticed I've done a lot lately to increase the quality of my posts, even the ones I make just to antagonize you (like the Bodybuilding one, lol). Posting of reference material, as well as more readily-verifiable material. Some issues people are just a little confused on, so I like to show some other sides of notions just to let people know there ARE other sides. Hence my attempt to tackle this subject:

For a long time Powerlifters and weight-lifters in general who train for efficiency have held a Maxim of "I do not train to look good, I train for results." Which is idealistically very viable. However, in certain respects it may not be an entirely correct notion to have when approaching training for maximum efficiency. This is evident with the emergence lately of more and more well-conditioned Strongmen, as well as some who in order to progress have had to just buck-up and understand that cheeseburgers are not a viable eating regimen staple for maximum ability. The days of big-gutted, maximum strength/minimum cardio capacity Strength Athletes is slowly waning. But there's good reasoning behind this.

Let's examine the notion of vasodilation. Meaning veins being big and pumping lots of blood. For some reason this has been associated with resulting from training for looks only and not results. However, that may not be the case. There is a term called Angiogenesis, which refers to the growth of new blood vessels from pre-existing blood vessels. This is typicaly the result of high-intensity exercise focusing on anaerobic activity.

There's a study that looked at muscle biopsies of ahtletes who utilized different metabolic systems. Olympic lifters who use the ATP-PC system, and runners who focus on aerobic systems. The lifters who performed heavy-resistence training didn't have increased capillary density. As a consequence of fiber hypertrophy induced by muscle overloading (sacrificing growth for blood-flow) capillary density was decreased in the lifters.

This might be a difference in training methods that needs to be better-balanced. High intensity anaerobic training (not so heavy weight with higher reps) paired with short rest periods increases muscle fiber capillary density.

The physiological advantages of having more dense capillaries:

More blood-flow enhances exchange of of metabolic byproducts during high-intensity exercise. This is because during high-intensity resistance training that results in increased capillary density and the number of capillaries in muscle makes for a shorter distance for red blood cells to travel for oxygen exchange (not gassing as much in a competition).

Also, recovery will increase. More blood vessels to muscle means more nutrient delivery, on top of more oxygen, and mytochondrial respiration (the mytochondria being like the power plant of a cell). This allows for quicker, and more thorough recovery from injuries.

So, to sum up, there is something to training not just for strength alone, but for conditioning as well. This is one of the reasons Super Marius has done well despite the recent discrepencies between the Organizations of Strength Athletics. I think because of his success, a lot of Strength Athletes took note that perhaps their diets and their conditioning routines needed tweaking, as I noticed even in the IFSA a lot of competitors look smaller than they were, but have better endurance and overall performance. Jesse Marunde with his smaller stature, more ripped physique, and from his own words regarding being engaged to a Nutritionist...better eating regimen had one of the best showings of his entire career if not THE best at the most recent WSM Competition. And now we know why.

References:

(Tesch PA, Thorsson A, Kaiser P. J Applied Physiol, 1984 Jan;56(1):35-38)
(Tesh PA, Med Sci Sports Exerc, 1988 Oct;20(5Suppl):S132-4)
(Prior BM, Yang HT, Terjung RL. J Apllied Physiol, 2004 Sep;97(3):1119-28)
 
I just wanted to add that the old sherdog saying "high reps are for pussies" is just untrue.
If done correctly high rep weighttraining is one of the mentally most taxing things you can do. The lactic acid alone will put you in a state close to puking the entire routine. So man up and circle in some high rep stuff from time to time!
 
graedy said:
I just wanted to add that the old sherdog saying "high reps are for pussies" is just untrue.
If done correctly high rep weighttraining is one of the mentally most taxing things you can do. The lactic acid alone will put you in a state close to puking the entire routine. So man up and circle in some high rep stuff from time to time!
Click to expand...

Anyone who says high reps are for pussies hasn't heard of 20-rep squats.
 
Or even better 20 rep cleans. Everything said seems totally logical especially for strongman, beens as its about being as strong for as long as possible, but i was under the impression that they always trained this way to an extent (maybe way off), with the use of a lot of timed rounds of lifting (as many lifts in 1min-1half as possible, especially when training props) as opposed to the usual 5x5 type schemes.

As for body composition, there is fat and then theres fat, marius is a freak and i cant see anyone else matching his strength or aesthetics, but i think the trend for more aestheticlly pleasing physiques and performance has been the case for some time, (important you undertsand i mean this relatively), with the likes of svend karlsen and magnus samuelsson.
But again so many variables come into it and it could be debated about forever, is it their training, diet, genetics that afford them these advantages in strngth and aesthetics, who knows.
 
King Kabuki said:
As many of you might have noticed I've done a lot lately to increase the quality of my posts, even the ones I make just to antagonize you (like the Bodybuilding one, lol). Posting of reference material, as well as more readily-verifiable material. Some issues people are just a little confused on, so I like to show some other sides of notions just to let people know there ARE other sides. Hence my attempt to tackle this subject:

For a long time Powerlifters and weight-lifters in general who train for efficiency have held a Maxim of "I do not train to look good, I train for results." Which is idealistically very viable. However, in certain respects it may not be an entirely correct notion to have when approaching training for maximum efficiency. This is evident with the emergence lately of more and more well-conditioned Strongmen, as well as some who in order to progress have had to just buck-up and understand that cheeseburgers are not a viable eating regimen staple for maximum ability. The days of big-gutted, maximum strength/minimum cardio capacity Strength Athletes is slowly waning. But there's good reasoning behind this.

Let's examine the notion of vasodilation. Meaning veins being big and pumping lots of blood. For some reason this has been associated with resulting from training for looks only and not results. However, that may not be the case. There is a term called Angiogenesis, which refers to the growth of new blood vessels from pre-existing blood vessels. This is typicaly the result of high-intensity exercise focusing on anaerobic activity.

There's a study that looked at muscle biopsies of ahtletes who utilized different metabolic systems. Olympic lifters who use the ATP-PC system, and runners who focus on aerobic systems. The lifters who performed heavy-resistence training didn't have increased capillary density. As a consequence of fiber hypertrophy induced by muscle overloading (sacrificing growth for blood-flow) capillary density was decreased in the lifters.

This might be a difference in training methods that needs to be better-balanced. High intensity anaerobic training (not so heavy weight with higher reps) paired with short rest periods increases muscle fiber capillary density.

The physiological advantages of having more dense capillaries:

More blood-flow enhances exchange of of metabolic byproducts during high-intensity exercise. This is because during high-intensity resistance training that results in increased capillary density and the number of capillaries in muscle makes for a shorter distance for red blood cells to travel for oxygen exchange (not gassing as much in a competition).

Also, recovery will increase. More blood vessels to muscle means more nutrient delivery, on top of more oxygen, and mytochondrial respiration (the mytochondria being like the power plant of a cell). This allows for quicker, and more thorough recovery from injuries.

So, to sum up, there is something to training not just for strength alone, but for conditioning as well. This is one of the reasons Super Marius has done well despite the recent discrepencies between the Organizations of Strength Athletics. I think because of his success, a lot of Strength Athletes took note that perhaps their diets and their conditioning routines needed tweaking, as I noticed even in the IFSA a lot of competitors look smaller than they were, but have better endurance and overall performance. Jesse Marunde with his smaller stature, more ripped physique, and from his own words regarding being engaged to a Nutritionist...better eating regimen had one of the best showings of his entire career if not THE best at the most recent WSM Competition. And now we know why.

References:

(Tesch PA, Thorsson A, Kaiser P. J Applied Physiol, 1984 Jan;56(1):35-38)
(Tesh PA, Med Sci Sports Exerc, 1988 Oct;20(5Suppl):S132-4)
(Prior BM, Yang HT, Terjung RL. J Apllied Physiol, 2004 Sep;97(3):1119-28)
Click to expand...

An interesting post surely, but my first thoughts:

First of all you take as an example strongmen. Basicly a sport made up of superheavyweights.

If we take the combative sports on the other hand we have lots of weight classes you want to fit in (as I know you are whery well aware of you boxer there..;) )..

So if we say training with whery low reps will build strength without putting on to much weight, on the other hand training for muscle endurance with higher repetitions ranges as in conditioning training, will neither build to much muscle. Both of these training repetetions to me sounds like viable alternatives for the combat athlete who got weightclasses to consider.

In betwen thes two extremes we got the range that traditionally is called the "hypertrophy" range. This is the repetition range who classically is considered to be the most effective to pack on muscle, that is also the repetition range that is most recognised to produce sarcoplasmic muscle growth, in other words "non functional" muscle growth.

For a fighter with weightclass considerations it would perhaps be wise to avoid this repetitions range, atleast avoid it to some degree.

But for the superheavyweight strongman competitor this repetition range may have some functions as slightly more oxygen for there muscle and so on which serves them well in their chossen sport. And more size for them really arent a handicap, it really only means that they will get easier to handle the external loading, functional muscle or not.

But is this type of training viable for the weightclass bound combat athlete and why?


Now im fairly drunk when writing this, im in no way saying that you are wrong Kabuki but this was my spontanious thoughts on the subject. Further discussion on the subject is apreciated.
 
One thing to consider though. On the level of an individual muscle, anthing extra such as mitochondria and blood vessels takes away from actual contractile proteins (sarcomeres).

Rather than include this as actual debate material, its more of an FYI. You aren't getting blood vessles and mitochondria at no cost, you give and take. This is part of the reason why strength athletes don't get super on edurance, they are sacrificing strength. Now, pure endurance is bad, as is strentgh. Its finding the equilbrium where you are strong, yet have good recovery that is key.

This is the reason for the higher force production in type II fibers, because of the more contractile tissue rather that mitochondria and such. This is also why the heart, which is 30% mitochondria, produces little force for its size. But, I'd rather have a heart that can go on for my lifespan than a super strong heart that gets tired and quits after 2 years of continuous work.
 
An interesting post surely, but my first thoughts:

First of all you take as an example strongmen. Basicly a sport made up of superheavyweights.

If we take the combative sports on the other hand we have lots of weight classes you want to fit in (as I know you are whery well aware of you boxer there..;) )..

So if we say training with whery low reps will build strength without putting on to much weight, on the other hand training for muscle endurance with higher repetitions ranges as in conditioning training, will neither build to much muscle. Both of these training repetetions to me sounds like viable alternatives for the combat athlete who got weightclasses to consider.

In betwen thes two extremes we got the range that traditionally is called the "hypertrophy" range. This is the repetition range who classically is considered to be the most effective to pack on muscle, that is also the repetition range that is most recognised to produce sarcoplasmic muscle growth, in other words "non functional" muscle growth.

For a fighter with weightclass considerations it would perhaps be wise to avoid this repetitions range, atleast avoid it to some degree.

But for the superheavyweight strongman competitor this repetition range may have some functions as slightly more oxygen for there muscle and so on which serves them well in their chossen sport. And more size for them really arent a handicap, it really only means that they will get easier to handle the external loading, functional muscle or not.

But is this type of training viable for the weightclass bound combat athlete and why?


Now im fairly drunk when writing this, im in no way saying that you are wrong Kabuki but this was my spontanious thoughts on the subject. Further discussion on the subject is apreciated.
Click to expand...

First of all props for making an intelligent post while fairly drunk.

There's a reason this thread was put in the S&P and Conditioning forums though, because it's more geared towards goals in strength versus conditioning, or strength with conditioning. Saying that fighting the two is stupid, while attempting to find the equilibrium Rj speaks of is very tough and thorough of a process.

Now taking this equation and applying it to fighting in weight divisions is even more tough. This is preliminary information, but applying it to the fight game I think is going to be a bit of a trial-and-error process, combined with a more refined balancing act of training/eating/supplement regimen. Idealistically a person can train for optimal strength and conditioning pretty much however they want if they tailor their eating to suit staying at a particular weight, along with supplementing. However it doesn't always work out that way on account of variables.
 
The more fit you are, the better your chance in imporoving any physical aspect faster
 
king kabuki, sets of how many reps and how much time rest in betwen sets are you talking about to develop more capillary density in muscle?
 
The rest time is one minute going by the studies. Set volume would just be higher reps at lower weight, like 10-20 rep sets as opposed to 5-8 rep sets.
 
Have any of y'all seen this article by chance? Granted it's bodybuilding oriented but the principle is the same: high rep work for increasing capillary density.

http://www.t-nation.com/readTopic.do?id=459605

I personally do light rep work, usually with bodyweight exercises, for aiding recovery in between lifting days.
 
Conditioning is for pussies... Everyone knows you don't need cardio to compete in strongman comps, only strength! otherwise it'd be Enduringman competitions or something.... MORE WEIGHT!!!
 
I believe your sarcasm detector is broken slick.
 
They're both chumps compared to Savickas, who whips them like fucking slaves.
 
Agreed homie, but Zavickus is one of the people I was hinting at in the IFSA who is also coming in a bit smaller than he has been before, but with better endurance.

Oh yeah and Henry > Zydrunas in the one competition that had both of them. lol
 
CarnalSalvation said:
They're both chumps compared to Savickas, who whips them like fucking slaves.
Click to expand...

Forbes Cowan rules all!

forbescowan.jpg
 
Conditioning is for pussies... Everyone knows you don't need cardio to compete in strongman comps, only strength! otherwise it'd be Enduringman competitions or something.... MORE WEIGHT!!!
Click to expand...

Don't get yourself hurt there little fella.

chapellesshowchappellesshowway.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,263,366
Messages
57,224,318
Members
175,588
Latest member
Macedonac Bogdan

Share this page

Back
Top