PDA

View Full Version : GPP: How much is too much?



Nick McC
08-04-2013, 02:38 PM
So I'm thinking of adding in some conditioning work but I don't want it to be a detriment to my strength gains. I'm sitting about 4 or 5 lbs over 220 which isn't much but I'd like to be just sitting around 220. I also want to do a few more athletic type things such as sprinting etc... just so that I can move a little better. I've also noticed my cardio tolerance has gotten terrible. Not like doing steady state cardio but just going up 3 flights of stairs leaves me more winded than it used to. So what are some of yalls favorite things to do for GPP? I don't have a sled but looking for ideas. Any crossfit type things ok and not going to leave me too underrecovered? For example, 15 kettlebell swings with a 70# DB, 15 goblet squats with said DB, R hand farmers carry for 30 yds, 15 swings, 15 squats, L hand farmers carry for 30 yds. Maybe repeat 3 times. Thinking about doing that today. Today is my second leg day of the week with volume deadlifts coming on Tuesday (today is Sunday). Plan on doing squats to @8 and perhaps just that (working into squatting 3 days per week). Too much?

ilovegreg05
08-04-2013, 05:16 PM
I currently do 10 sets of 5, of medium box jumps. 30 secs rest between each set and I focus on being explosive. I do this 2x a week. I also keep my food intake very consistent.

Hope this helps!

GBB
08-05-2013, 07:20 PM
After reading Joel Jamieson's 'Ultimate MMA Conditioning' I've come to the belief that powerlifters are best staying away from high intensity cardio altogether. It has too much of a cost in recovery terms and predominately develops an energy system that isn't very important to a powerlifter.

The way Joel handles conditioning for sports is to look at which energy systems are most important to a sport and specifically target them. For a powerlifter virtually all effort in training and competing utilises the ATP-CP system, which can sustain about 10 seconds worth of effort.

The recovery processes of removing metabolic byproducts and re-synthesizing ATP between sets/attempts are driven by the aerobic energy system, specifically the ability of the heart to efficiently move blood around the body. A heart that can move blood around the body more efficiently leads to a higher work capacity, which I believe is very advantageous for a powerlifter.

From what I can gather, the Aerobic Lactic System (which can sustain effort for about 90 seconds) really isn't important to a powerlifter. But, stuff like HIIT, Crossfit workouts, kettlebell workouts etc. predominantly develop the Aerobic Lactic System.

Whilst that type of work will also develop some aspects of the aerobic system, the efficiency of the heart at moving blood around the body is largely driven by its stroke volume (the volume blood it can hold). Intense efforts, such as high intensity cardio and lifting weights, predominately result in thickening of the walls of the heart, increasing the power of the heart, but not its capacity. Only low to moderate intensity cardio for duration of over 30 mins can effectively increase stroke volume.

This is because it in effect stretches the heart by keeping it filling to its maximum capacity for a long period of time. Above about 150 bpm the heart doesn't have time between beats to fully fill with blood and the duration needs to be at least 30 mins to be effective; so stuff like 10-20 mins of intervals is useless for developing stroke volume.

The sweet spot is 130-150 bpm, which is a brisk uphill walk or slow jog for most people. Obviously it's going to be counterproductive if a powelifter tries to get into marathon running aerobic condition, but 1-3 hours per week in the 130-150 bpm zone is likely to aid rather than hinder recovery, increase work capacity and will certainly stop anyone getting winded walking up a couple of flights of stairs.

It would be good to hear other opinions and, if I've got this totally wrong, explanations as to why high intensity cardio is more beneficial to powerlifters than LISS.

r1smith
08-06-2013, 01:02 PM
While the importance of not neglecting aerobic work is great, ignoring "Aerobic Lactic System" is a little off base. Energy systems are not that simple and there can be a lot of interplay between them; case and point: even aerobic work is important for powerlifters.

Aerobic-lactic conditioning can improve the storage efficiency of ATP as well as increase the efficiency of creatine phosphate usage. There are also very good at improving one's VO2 max and will do so much quicker than solely focusing on aerobic.



For the OP:

Too much GPP is when it has a negative impact on ur lifts. Start small and add slowly. Add a 5 min finisher to the end of your workout on your easier days and work from there. And if you really want to cut weight, tightening up your diet is the most effective way (i.e. eat less junk).

dallasreilly
08-06-2013, 01:16 PM
While the importance of not neglecting aerobic work is great, ignoring "Aerobic Lactic System" is a little off base. Energy systems are not that simple and there can be a lot of interplay between them; case and point: even aerobic work is important for powerlifters.

Aerobic-lactic conditioning can improve the storage efficiency of ATP as well as increase the efficiency of creatine phosphate usage. There are also very good at improving one's VO2 max and will do so much quicker than solely focusing on aerobic.



For the OP:

Too much GPP is when it has a negative impact on ur lifts. Start small and add slowly. Add a 5 min finisher to the end of your workout on your easier days and work from there. And if you really want to cut weight, tightening up your diet is the most effective way (i.e. eat less junk).

^This all around, great post.

I'm stronger when doing GPP, no doubt. It's "fun", keeps you able to walk up stairs, and helps with recovery and mobility. I usually do the sled, farmers walks, or tire flips (our tires go 230, 600, 700 or something so I use the 230...300 would be better for me I think but 20 flips with 230 for speed isn't easy).

GBB
08-06-2013, 05:27 PM
While the importance of not neglecting aerobic work is great, ignoring "Aerobic Lactic System" is a little off base. Energy systems are not that simple and there can be a lot of interplay between them; case and point: even aerobic work is important for powerlifters.

Aerobic-lactic conditioning can improve the storage efficiency of ATP as well as increase the efficiency of creatine phosphate usage. There are also very good at improving one's VO2 max and will do so much quicker than solely focusing on aerobic.



For the OP:

Too much GPP is when it has a negative impact on ur lifts. Start small and add slowly. Add a 5 min finisher to the end of your workout on your easier days and work from there. And if you really want to cut weight, tightening up your diet is the most effective way (i.e. eat less junk).

Sorry, “aerobic lactic” was a typo, it should’ve been ‘anaerobic lactic’.

From what Joel writes in Ultimate MMA Conditioning, there is very little room for development of the alactic system. This is because there are so few chemical reactions involved in generating ATP from phosphocreatine, it is an extremely efficient process and there is little room for increasing the efficiency of ATP generation/use within the alactic system. There’s also little room for increasing the capacity of the muscles to store phosphocreatine.

The methods Joel advises to develop the very small improvements possible in the storage and efficiency of ATP generation/use within the alactic system are more akin to general powerlifting training than GPP (basically the ME and DE methods). That base is pretty much covered by lifting weights.

So I still can’t see how GPP methods which predominantly develop the anaerobic lactic system, and neglect aerobic capacity, are useful to a powerlifter.

By the way, I don’t wanting to come across as confrontational at all, I think it’s an interesting topic and I’m just trying to get a discussion going in an effort to develop my understanding of it.

Nick McC
08-06-2013, 06:46 PM
Well I think I will probably do a quick literature search on the topic, if there is any on this topic (Journal of S&C puts out some pretty good stuff on a wide variety of topics). I've also heard some other anecdotal evidence that some GPP would help one be more efficient throughout a full powerlifting meet than if they don't do it at all (again, an anecdote just as everything else listed). I think I will just add some things very slowly and see how it works out. I've already cleaned up my diet and lost some weight but really my desire for implementing some GPP work is just to feel better and move better and be able to do more things. Powerlifting is the number one focus but I wouldn't mind being a little faster sprint wise and also feel like I'm not out of shape.

r1smith
08-06-2013, 11:10 PM
So I still can’t see how GPP methods which predominantly develop the anaerobic lactic system, and neglect aerobic capacity, are useful to a powerlifter.


Perhaps you should read more than one book on the subject.

And remember, doing GPP is also a means of raising ur work capacity so your body can handle more work as you progress.

GBB
08-07-2013, 03:00 PM
Correct me if I’m wrong but the fundamental ethos of RTS appears to be about understanding the effect and purpose of each exercise/protocol and, from that understanding, using those protocols to target the qualities you need to develop the in the most optimal way.

Case in point is Mike’s view on dynamic effort work, which he believes is only really needed if someone has a specific deficiency in that area. Lots of people firmly believe they benefit from doing dynamic effort work twice a week, and I’m sure they do, but Mike’s very educated belief is that it is not optimal. That they would see more benefit from a protocol specific to their needs.

What I’m trying to say is that, although a lot of powerlifters firmly believe they benefit from high intensity conditioning protocols, and I’m sure they do, is basing most of their conditioning around them optimal?

Most sports have very complex training demands, in MMA for example; maximal strength, power, aerobic conditioning and anaerobic conditioning are all vitally important, along with lots of skill development.

Powerlifting s very simple in comparison. For a powerlifting maximal strength is fundamental, power isn’t particularly important and anaerobic conditioning is completely redundant because a powerlifter will never stray out of the ATP-CP system in competition and rarely in training. Aerobic conditioning is more important because the recovery of the ATP-CP system is an aerobic process driven by the ability of the heart to move blood around the body. But, beyond a certain point, a powerlifter probably isn’t going benefit that much from a massively well developed aerobic capacity.

Conditioning protocols which involve repeated short bursts of high effort primarily work in and develop the anaerobic lactic system, which appears to be redundant for a powerlifter. Such protocols clearly also develop the aerobic system, but, they develop the contractile strength of the heart rather than its capacity; the heart’s contractile strength can also be developed by lifting weights.

I may have been a bit off base saying powerlifter should stay away from, high intensity conditioning altogether. However, I just can’t see the need for basing most of one’s conditioning around highly taxing protocols when a moderate amount of low intensity steady state cardio appears to offer more benefits at less cost in terms of recovery. It just doesn’t seem to be the optimal way to train to me.

BobW
08-07-2013, 09:58 PM
Keeping in mind I do strongman: I think a mix is in order, if possible. When I was physically capable of it, Mike and I would program different ranges of work: steady state (and the following numbers are all coming from memory b/c I'm too lazy to look them up): 120-140. 140-160, 165-175, 175-185.

We'd hit these different ranges during different portions of the macrocycle, and Mike had a pretty unique way of determining volume based on recovery time to starting heart rate as to how much was enough. The surprising thing: it didn't take very many sets to hit the target recovery threshold.

This really did put me in the best conditioning of my career, bar none. I was able to recover from events more quickly and more fully, and perform very well at the end of the day, after 4 long events.

OBoile
08-09-2013, 01:28 PM
Correct me if I’m wrong but the fundamental ethos of RTS appears to be about understanding the effect and purpose of each exercise/protocol and, from that understanding, using those protocols to target the qualities you need to develop the in the most optimal way.

Case in point is Mike’s view on dynamic effort work, which he believes is only really needed if someone has a specific deficiency in that area. Lots of people firmly believe they benefit from doing dynamic effort work twice a week, and I’m sure they do, but Mike’s very educated belief is that it is not optimal. That they would see more benefit from a protocol specific to their needs.

What I’m trying to say is that, although a lot of powerlifters firmly believe they benefit from high intensity conditioning protocols, and I’m sure they do, is basing most of their conditioning around them optimal?

Most sports have very complex training demands, in MMA for example; maximal strength, power, aerobic conditioning and anaerobic conditioning are all vitally important, along with lots of skill development.

Powerlifting s very simple in comparison. For a powerlifting maximal strength is fundamental, power isn’t particularly important and anaerobic conditioning is completely redundant because a powerlifter will never stray out of the ATP-CP system in competition and rarely in training. Aerobic conditioning is more important because the recovery of the ATP-CP system is an aerobic process driven by the ability of the heart to move blood around the body. But, beyond a certain point, a powerlifter probably isn’t going benefit that much from a massively well developed aerobic capacity.

Conditioning protocols which involve repeated short bursts of high effort primarily work in and develop the anaerobic lactic system, which appears to be redundant for a powerlifter. Such protocols clearly also develop the aerobic system, but, they develop the contractile strength of the heart rather than its capacity; the heart’s contractile strength can also be developed by lifting weights.

I may have been a bit off base saying powerlifter should stay away from, high intensity conditioning altogether. However, I just can’t see the need for basing most of one’s conditioning around highly taxing protocols when a moderate amount of low intensity steady state cardio appears to offer more benefits at less cost in terms of recovery. It just doesn’t seem to be the optimal way to train to me.

GBB, I think you are correct here. Someone who is focusing solely on PL should avoid or at least minimize the amount of high intensity conditioning work they do. The cost (in terms of recovery) to benefit ratio is very poor for powerlifting.

Edit to add: just read the last post by BobW and I also agree with him. Strongman uses the various energy systems differently than powerlifting so high intensity conditioning work that focuses on the anaerobic lactic system would be valuable here.

Mike Tuchscherer
08-15-2013, 04:26 AM
First off, great thread!
It's a complex question -- even for powerlifting. As with all things there are trade-offs and how you balance those trade-offs will determine the difference.

I think from a simple energy system standpoint, LISS makes much more sense for a Powerlifter. As was mentioned earlier, the Anaerobic Lactic system is a little-used system for a Powerlifter. On the other hand, a reasonably well developed aerobic system will help you recover between sets and between sessions. That means you could handle greater training volumes, which would in theory result in more strength.

The down side comes in terms of training means. What training means will produce 30 minutes of effort with a heart rate of ~130? Usually it's walking / jogging / biking, etc. On the other hand, if we do Anaerobic Lactic interval training, now we can do other things and potentially kill two birds with one stone. Perhaps you do a circuit with kettlebell swings, rows, high pulls, etc, etc. You get your heart rate in the zones required for anaerobic lactic development and also add training volume to relevant muscle groups. Heck, if you were super specific, you could even perform circuits of the competition lifts that could train energy systems and also skill development too. That's not really possible if you're keeping the heart rate low. But the other side of that coin is, as was mentioned, it won't have the same training effects on the heart.

I personally think the answer is closer to what we did with Bob's training. At some stages of training, opting for LISS makes sense from a training economy standpoint. But in other stages, the objectives shift and perhaps it's more beneficial to do some interval work.

As a caveat, this is what Dr Mike Zourdos's Concurrent Training (https://store.reactivetrainingsystems.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=116) presentation was all about. He had ample evidence to support his claim that LISS was not beneficial and was probably harmful to strength development. But context is everything and I'd still claim that it has it's place in the annual cycle.