Steady State vs Periodization

Hi everyone,

This is my first post since I joined the Foundation course around 4 months ago so hope I'm not raising a not so clever question as I've been learning a lot about GST. A few years ago I bought coach Sommer's book, building the gymnastic body, and in it he explains that the best training cycle he has for his athletes is the steady state cycle. That is to choose a set number of sets and reps/duration and stick with it for the entire cycle even if the exercises become really easy. Foundation is based on periodization within steady state as such, as the mini-cycles (of 4 weeks) are periodized, but a complete cycle (of 12 weeks) consists of three of those mini-cycles (hence I say steady state as you repeat the set x reps/duration scheme of the mini-cycle).

My question is, why is the Foundation Courses not based solely on the steady state approach instead of periodization? Especially if coach says its the best method of training. I understand how periodization works in that, you work above your current thresh-hold in performance so as to apply stimulus and then deload to recover, adapt and become stronger in response to that stimulus. The thing I didn't get with the mini-cycle templates is that as you progress through the weeks and repeat the cycles, you become stronger, and so isn't doing work below that threshold pointless? Unless maybe we talk about developing that tendon strength gradually that is.

So, for example, lets say we are testing mastery but we didn't reach the last few reps on the last set. The stimulus is provided as we went to our limit (with good form and tempo). We de-load and recover for a week. The mini-cycle begins again but the first two weeks in our template are below our performance threshold. That means that for three weeks we have been performing under what we are capable of and have no clue of our progress either. And with under performing, isn't it the case whereby if you don't use it you lose it? Well I understand in this case we won't be losing but it seems that it would only be maintained as we only get one full performance week every mini-cycle. 

For me a pure steady state cycle seems superior. You are subjected to the same work load throughout the entire cycle and so progress can be tracked accordingly too as you'll see yourself improving (or not improving) on a weekly basis. I just think that this periodization is the reason a lot of people struggle especially with the higher rep/duration templates as you continue to work under what you are capable of. For me, in the example I gave, instead of returning to the first week of the mini-cycle I would work from the second week of the mini-cycle as that is the week I was capable of last performing without failure or difficulty (since I was shooting for mastery it means the second week should have been quite reasonable in completing). So why train something less than that?

What are your thoughts on this as I am going to change to steady state? I do truly believe it is superior. First post and its a bit of a big one so sorry about that.

Thanks

Steady state is superior if you are a seasoned athlete and way past foundation stuff.

It is recommented that you simply repeat the whole mini, but for me it does not work. I continue where i can and try to add the reps. I thin that when i am in those 5 x 5 mastery sets its totally different. But now on 5 x 15 i have to do thisway.

I'm not an expert, but...

1. steady state is superior for superior athletes.  Building the Gymnastic Body was written for advanced beginner athletes.

2. what the Foundations courses recommend is the basic powerlifting template that has produced hulking dinosaurs in the weight room and strips of muscle and sinew on the pommel horse for decades

Don't push yourself faster than your connective tissues adapt. That means follow the course and terminate a set when your tempo or form diminshes.

Riku Calderón said:

Steady state is superior if you are a seasoned athlete and way past foundation stuff.

It is recommented that you simply repeat the whole mini, but for me it does not work. I continue where i can and try to add the reps. I thin that when i am in those 5 x 5 mastery sets its totally different. But now on 5 x 15 i have to do thisway.

I see. I guess one of the reasons I brought up this topic is because I see on the forum that a lot of people are getting stuck and hitting plateaus on the higher rep schemes. So they always have to diverge from standard template. You yourself Riku are doing this. So I just wonder how many people on the foundation course have actually past for example HBP PE2 using only the standard template for achieving the mastery of. For those who do so easily I'm betting they had prior training experience but for the new and even relatively new, has this actually worked?

For the higher rep templates steady state seems more adequate both physically and mentally. As you stated riku, you continue where you can and strive for extra reps if possible. This can be daunting if you don't see yourself adding those reps as gaining that strength won't come within just a weeks time. Steady state therefore relieves you of this as you can spend the whole cycle not worrying about adding reps but knowing as the exercise becomes easier that you are growing stronger.

I do agree that foundation for the lower 5x5 can and should work but I'm not convinced for the 5x15. Anyone completed higher reps without changing the original template? By the way the only reason I question it is because I don't want to waste time. As I said, at the end of all the mini-cycles you end up training most of the time below what your actually capable of, so you have no idea if your strength is improving or not.

Jay B. said:

I'm not an expert, but...

 

1. steady state is superior for superior athletes.  Building the Gymnastic Body was written for advanced athletes.

 

2. what the Foundations courses recommend is the basic powerlifting template that has produced hulking dinosaurs in the weight room and strips of muscle and sinew on the pommel horse for decades

 

Don't push yourself faster than your connective tissues adapt. That means follow the course and terminate a set when your tempo or form diminshes.

Another reason I brought up the topic is because I know I shouldn't push myself but in my case its not because of connective tissue but because I've been dealing with something chronic for about two years now. It hasn't been diagnosed but I should be getting a specialist fairly soon. With me the case is that I had gotten some sort of infection at the back of my throat but ever since I got it, it hadn't really gone away. My immune system seems to have plummeted and I get sick very often and for the most part I always feel fatigued. Before I would get sick like every two to three weeks. It's triggered a lot more easily when I get physically or mentally stressed. So intense exercise or just stress from work or uni stuff would get to me. I've gotten more of a handle on it now because I recognize when I start reaching my limit and so I know I have to back off from training, otherwise I'd get sick and have to miss out on a week of training until I feel capable of exercising again. Unfortunately, I can't push myself the way I used to . This is why I think I can't follow foundation to the letter. I'd like to give it a serious try but whenever I push myself (as is needed in foundation) on the day I'd be able to do it, but after my throat will start throbbing and the next day I'll start feeling terrible. It's the initial stages to my usual sick days. If I continue to push I get worse and for instance the last time this happened was quite bad as the sickness lasted a month!! Had to stop training for a week and a half. I have extremely low recovery basically when it comes to pushing my self to the limit (even if that limit is just good form and tempo). With foundation if for example week 2 is my limit, I wouldn't be able to perform the third week because my fatigue will have been topped. I would need a de-load right after week two. So I can't keep up with the template. I dropped down to foundation three times a week because of this too but even then I feel the volume is too much. This is why I want to move to steady state as I know the initial stages of the cycle will be tough, but I can go at my own pace throughout the cycle not worrying about weeks, reps, sets or even training days. Basically I have come to terms with the fact that its best that I train when I feel capable of training. When I'm recovered and ready for it. So does anyone think that I should do steady state going at my own pace, training when I'm good to go or do foundation as it is and perhaps drop to just two foundation days a week? My worry with the latter is that the I might not be training enough times in the week and so I don't receive enough stimulus, wasting time in the process to figure it out. Steady state setting my own training days when possible seems to be the better choice but what do people think?

I think you received an answer. It wasn't the one you wanted. It won't change just because you ask again. I'm sure some agree with you but I think most will say follow the template.

howens said:

I think you received an answer. It wasn't the one you wanted. It won't change just because you ask again. I'm sure some agree with you but I think most will say follow the template.

No its fine. I'm looking for guidance but I don't think you understood my circumstances. The current template my body simply cannot keep up with. I'll get sick if I try and attempt it. The volume coupled with the intensity as it progresses through the mini-cycle becomes too much for me to handle and keep up. So if I were to stick with foundation with periodization I thought of some options:

1) As mentioned previously, Foundation three times a week can sometimes still be too much so drop it down to twice a week only

2) After reaching my 'limit' even if it is in week 1 or 2 take a de-load week straight after and start mini-cycle from scratch thereafter

3) Train with the template but do as many days as I am capable of. No set number of training days per week.

My ears are open to all suggestions. I am just trying to not waste time figuring out what is best to do for my circumstances.

Thanks again

Really even the 3 day / week split can't be consistently trained? In that position I'd probably drop myself to 1*F7 per week to pamper my recovery resources. Take a walk the other days, use the time to stretch.

I'm gonna wax a little lyrical about conditioning here, might get off topic

Steady state is so effective because of the focus on gradual conditioning of connective tissue which is front and centre for being able to train straight arm rings streng and gain from it. Foundation level work does this too, of course, but these are not generally exercises you are going to hurt f with-- you will have worked up to it in an easier progression. Roadblocks are also a safety valve that way-- you wont find yourself training elements your body is not already conditioned to deal with at least in training.

Working three different variations of pushups? For 4-12 weeks each? Thats somewhere between 12-36weeks spending time in front support. Not to spoil F2 but dips? A long time spent in various support positions. While you are training your muscles towards the progression, the shapes and positions are what is really working the magic on your gristle. In a way you are running long SSC cycles of, say, shoulder conditioning when you're spending those weeks and months hanging on a bar, even though its not the obvious focus of HLL.

I do not think ssc are necessary for foundation level work; you could use them but given the basic nature of it -- by which I mean the low amount of physical preparation required to train it effectively as distinct from rings and dynamic work which can only be safely and productively undertaken with a pre-prepared frame-- I think you would be taking more time than necessary and, by virtue of working at a lower average intensity, will shortchange your progress. It'll work, but us foundation level people have too much to improve to take so long on each step

YMMV, naturally.

Thanks Jon, you have given me the information I needed as to why I should most certainly stick with periodization. 

As for how to deal with it for me personally, F7x1 is still going to have the same effect or perhaps worse. Taking for example since I was going to try ssc I pushed hard for two days. The side effects of that did appear even after the first day but I pushed on with the second regardless. Felt it effect me most definitely and it was bordering what I can handle. But I need to rest of it now I'm sure. Three days after is when I would be able to workout again. so if I tried F7x1 I'm guessing I would get fried immediately the day after. Plus I do foundation with HS1 so I've always been trying 3 Foundation + 2 HS. 5 days total. But I always feel tired with this a lot of the time and then give out. Obviously I prioritize foundation so what ends up happening a lot of the time is I skip a HS workout.

Either ways, I will definitely stick with periodization and find a way that matches with my recovery ability and which will allow me to progress as quickly as possible. So looking forward to it 

Also, does that mean that people have always had to change the templates for higher rep stuff (5x15) to achieve the goal (remembering they would have no prior training experience or simply achieved half the reps actually required when they started). I think most people still change the reps on the template right? Not too much of a worry, its just for curiosity as I still don't believe the template works for the higher rep stuff. But we shall see 

Thanks again fellas

Doesn't coach write in the courses that you can train one day per week  if that's all your recovery can handle?

It sounds like you have some unique circumstances which we might not understand. Ultimately, you know best what you can handle.

I found that the programming progresses faster I can so some adjustments are necessary. I'm not always able to add reps each workout so I might stay at the same rep range for a while (and no, it's not because I'm not working hard enough).

Jay B. said:

Doesn't coach write in the courses that you can train one day per week  if that's all your recovery can handle?

Couldn't find this unfortunately. Low recovery should do only three times per week is the minimum he had stated.

The Hansenator said:

It sounds like you have some unique circumstances which we might not understand. Ultimately, you know best what you can handle.

 

I found that the programming progresses faster I can so some adjustments are necessary. I'm not always able to add reps each workout so I might stay at the same rep range for a while (and no, it's not because I'm not working hard enough).

Yeah I am going to press on no matter what and just take it easy when I feel that I'm about to get sick again. Its always been an ego thing saying to myself no keep going, there's nothing wrong with me and I'll be fine. Far from it so I'll make the adjustments accordingly since this seems to be the case for most people either ways with the higher rep stuff.

I found this advice very helpful for stages with steps that are too steep:

https://www.gymnasticbodies.com/forum/topic/16794-rcpe1-help/

Thats a really good idea. Would have never thought of using the templates for the other rep range targets. Thanks. If the time comes I get stuck I'll do this most likely.