Question about two seemingly opposite training systems

Welcome to Complementary Training Community! Forums Endurance Training and Conditioning Question about two seemingly opposite training systems

This topic contains 2 replies, has 2 voices, and was last updated by  Pablo Nejamis 5 years ago.

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • 29/08/2017 at 23:01 #20413

    Hi! I’m a trainer based in Argentina. I’m new to this site and am enjoying it a lot! Currently I’m training someone for a Judo competition and I’m in two minds about two seemingly opposite training systems:
    1) The strength-aerobic method (attributed to Verkhoshansky here), where performance is enhanced by working with submaximal efforts with a typical 15s/15s work-rest ratio at 7 min intervals for as long as 45 min. Resistance training circuits and/or submax sprint work and plyometrics are used in this system. The rational behind it is to improve the efficiency of your neuromuscular system, raise your reactive strength levels and not so much to improve your glycolitic and aerobic systems, avoiding lactic acid production and delaying fatigue onset. Also, in this system you avoid cardio as it’s supposed to decrease your performance since it works primarily on your ST fibers, making you slow.

    2) Improving your ‘aerobic window’
    This approach is maybe more familiar to me: basically you improve your aerobic contribution to energy production by raising your lactate threshold and also by improving your cardiac output, thus raising your aerobic contribution to strength performance (Jamie Jamieson here) and recovery between efforts

    I’m confused as both systems seem fine but they seem to contradict each other. In addition, as far as the first system is concerned, using lots of plyometrics and relatively high intensities is risking getting injured. Also in the strength-aerobic method,they recommend staying away from the glycolitic zone to avoid fatigue; however, in Judo sometimes you cross over to the glycolitic zone and it doesn’t seem wise not to train this area.

    I would much appreciate your thoughts on this dilemma

    Best regards,

    Pablo

    mm
    06/09/2017 at 23:50 #20469

    Hi Pablo,

    Sorry for the delay. There are multiple layers of the answer to your question.

    1- First, I would use method based terminology, rather than objective based terminology.
    2 – the two method might differ in modality selected. Aerobic plyometric is a method that uses low-intensity plyos
    3 – In the case of uncertainty the best you can do to begin with is to follow 1/N Heuristic, or do both modalities

    07/09/2017 at 01:16 #20471

    Hi Mladen,

    Thanks for taking the time to reply.

    Just two points I’m not so clear on:

    I would appreciate it if you could clarify what you mean in point 1 by “method based terminology, rather than objective based terminology”.

    Also in point 3 you recommend follow ing “1/N heur√≠stics”. I’m not really familiar with that term. Would you mind expanding a little on that?

    Thanks a lot in advance!

    Pablo

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.