Plyometrics

la1TliIOEu0

An interesting clip showing various plyometric jumps and other types of training.

I have to say I disagree with Yessis's point about becoming slow from slow-heavy training and the maintainance of strength from plyometric activities only, but the combination of methods is the way to go if you are interested in this kind of abilities.

Ido.

Ido Portal said:

I have to say I disagree with Yessis's point about becoming slow from slow-heavy training and the maintainance of strength from plyometric activities only...

i think yessis's statement is a half truth... if you change focus from max strength to max speed you will shift the rate of force production curve... the athlete's overall strength should be maintained or increased (depending on the training protocol) but due to neural detraining, but will likely see a small drop in max lifts... although they both play a role, i think its important to remember that in many sports rate of force production is more imporant than max strength...

IMO plyometric training CANNOT keep your heavy lifting strnength up! It can help but not keep it up there thats for sure... To keep your neaural effiecency you need to stay lifting heavy one a week or so.

if you change focus from max strength to max speed you will shift the rate of force production curve

I am sorry, but this is simply an incorrect statement. The rate of force development can be effected with heavy lifting, as long as you try to accelerate the load during the concentric phase as fast as possible. Even if it moves slowly, but the intention and the neural drive is maximal, you will effect the rate of force development factor.

Also, if anyone thinks he can maintain maximal strength with purely plyometric training, you are sadly mistaken. I would like to see the poor powerlifter who would stop squating for one year and perform only depth jumps... He will be crushed when trying his old 1RM max after this period.

Ido.

Ido Portal said:

if you change focus from max strength to max speed you will shift the rate of force production curve

I am sorry, but this is simply an incorrect statement. The rate of force development can be effected with heavy lifting, as long as you try to accelerate the load during the concentric phase as fast as possible. Even if it moves slowly, but the intention and the neural drive is maximal, you will effect the rate of force development factor.

Also, if anyone thinks he can maintain maximal strength with purely plyometric training, you are sadly mistaken. I would like to see the poor powerlifter who would stop squating for one year and perform only depth jumps... He will be crushed when trying his old 1RM max after this period.

Ido.

Yeah, I wonder about the age of the video and whether or not the science at the time showed this, or if Yessis was simply wrong on this point.

Ido Portal said:

Also, if anyone thinks he can maintain maximal strength with purely plyometric training, you are sadly mistaken.

i did not say this...

Ido Portal said:

I have to say I disagree with Yessis's point about becoming slow from slow-heavy training and the maintainance of strength from plyometric activities only...

i said this is a half truth... it's a two part statement... i agree with yessis's point that training only slow movements does not make an athlete faster... and i disagree with the fact that you can maintain max strength through only doing plyo's...

griffdrc said:

if you change focus from max strength to max speed you will shift the rate of force production curve...

how is this statement false? the studies i have read show that training adaptations are velocity specific... changing the training protocol should also change the effects of the training...

Ido Portal said:

The rate of force development can be effected with heavy lifting, as long as you try to accelerate the load during the concentric phase as fast as possible. Even if it moves slowly, but the intention and the neural drive is maximal, you will effect the rate of force development factor.

this is an interesting concept... unfortunately i have never seen a study investigating this...

i have seen studies that show that the neural activation during visualization and performance are the same... motor unit recruitment plays a large role in the rate of force production...

how is this statement false? the studies i have read show that training adaptations are velocity specific... changing the training protocol should also change the effects of the training...

No, the training adaptations are not velocity specific, they are motor unit activation specific. As long as you recruit the right motor units by trying to achieve maximal accleration, even percieved 'slow work' with maximal loads will make you faster. This is exactly why heavy squatting is so popular with 100m athletes, jumpers, etc...

There is no evidance that velocity specific training is neccesary, especialy since this is taken care of by the sport itself..

this is an interesting concept... unfortunately i have never seen a study investigating this...

Jones et al. The Effects of Compensatory Acceleration on Upper Body Strength and Power. J. Strength and Cond. Res. 10(4): 287, 1996.

Here you go. That is just the most famous one, there are others.

Ido.

Also, Starting Strength: Basic Barbell Training (2nd edition), page 170 talks about it quite a bit. They use Louie Simmons and George Hechter as an example. However, in the pages preceding it, they also talk quite a bit about velocity, but that may be due to the specific nature of the exercise talked about (power clean on that page).

I have to say I disagree with Yessis's point about becoming slow from slow-heavy training

In my experience continuing to focus too extensively on "slow-heavy training" will indeed make an athlete slow. Maximal strength pursured past what is required for optimum performance in your chosen sporting endeavor is a sure path to athletic mediocrity. However a lack of sufficient maximal strength is also problematic. The trick is knowing when enough is enough.

Several years ago, I took Allan too far down the path of maximal strength and his overall athletic abilities began to suffer; as measured by speed of rope climbs etc and in direct comparison with other athletes at US Jr National Team Training Camps. As a consequence of this revelation, I restructured his conditioning to focus more heavily on explosive strength/plyometic strength and active flexibility as well as relegating his maximal strength work to maintainence only.

A National Championship was the result of this restructuring.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

During the competitive season, do you focus mostly on explosive strength or a mix of maximal and explosive strength?

I was thinking we workout MWF and that for one of my boys who is very strong, I will focus 2/3 on explosive strength and for the other boys who are lacking in maximal strength I will focus 2/3 on maximal strength. As well I am currently competing NAIGC mainly for the competitive experience and to also test out many of the GB programming.

I competed before Thanksgiving and was delighted to find out I had no endurance issues from my first routine on FX to my 6th event (though my elbow started irking me on PB). Granted my routines are only 8 skills, missing in some categories, and currently only A's right now (the arabian, hand front or tsuk on V and more advanced dismounts still need more work and rust to be worked off). My next meet is the last week of January and I've been struggling with staying in one piece as my ankle likes to swell upon any tumbling or vaulting besides my elbow rebelling. I have just started implementing your elbow rehab and it helped a bit this week besides continuing shoulder rehab and mobility.

For myself, I have thought about switching to 2/3 explosive vs 2/3 maximal but as I'm still trying to nail down a few more strength elements (my FL>BL and straight arm press HS on rings besides Japanese Y-HS on FX and press to straddle planche) I have favored on keeping to still work maximal strength. I have no problems maintaining strength or power throughout the routines despite the lack of metabolic conditioning I omitted from my programming and merely working 2-3 routines per event days. My goals are modest but I believe within reach by the one of the last NAIGC meets in March/April. I had hoped to add in a felge but it isn't worth anything but will be using a birdie-up in my ring routine or kip to L. Once I get my air sense back, I will see about adding a full (though I'm concerned a bit about landing it with my ankle) though I will omit the side summi or hopes of a double back on FX till next season.

The first boy is a L5 who can MU and BL and a slight error FL when he is fresh besides momentary straddle planche. He is also ridiculously tight except in the range of shoulder extension. He climbs up the rope in around 6s with a 20m sprint of around 3.7s and a VJ of around 13-14"@height of 52" weighing in around 55lbs (he has long struggled with GERD which recently we are just getting around).

He can perform 20PU on rings, 15 skin the cats and nearly 20 dips on PB. He has a L-sit time between 35s-70s. I can't remember anymore. He can press on floor from straddle and straddle-L press to HS on PB and has pressed to HS from straddle planche before. While he still has yet to master the more advanced ring support strength movements and his bent arm strength needs more work ( he has a hard time PPU but can HeSPU from HeS and free HS ).

While my L4 and the L2's and L3's in the same group are still struggling with the basic L4 strength holds of L-sit and L-hang, clean LongHangPullOver, pullup and pushup form, etc. I still believe they need to keep on focusing on those basic maximal strength holds so they do not suffer deductions in their routines

Coach, due to the nature of gymnastics training, when you are referring to 'maximal strength' it usualy involves isometrics or eccentric work mainly. This may indeed produce completely different results with explosive training which is more dynamic and concentric in nature.

I do agree with the need to combine faster, more explosive and dynamic work, but with some athletes and some sports, that is mainly taken care of with the sport itself. It is important, then, that the work in the weight room becomes more maximal effort, in a try to maximize results and best use your training time.

My original argument was that maximal miometric work will not make you slow, even though it is slowed down by the heavy load.

Ido.

Ido Portal said:

Jones et al. The Effects of Compensatory Acceleration on Upper Body Strength and Power. J. Strength and Cond. Res. 10(4): 287, 1996.

thanks for the study... however, it compares the method you mentioned to conventional training... i am curious to see how it compares to plyometric and variable resistence training...

Ido Portal said:

The rate of force development can be effected with heavy lifting, as long as you try to accelerate the load during the concentric phase as fast as possible. Even if it moves slowly, but the intention and the neural drive is maximal, you will effect the rate of force development factor.

i think one of the major flaw is the decceleration period of the lift... 25-50% of a movement... this period would have sub optimal conditions... i believe the force vs time curve could be effected more favorably by plyometric exercises and variable resistence training...

i do not doubt that compensatory acceleration training will produce increases in strength and power... i am not saying that there isn't a place for it in training... but i am curious if this is the best tool for the job...

My friend,

you have made a different point in your last post and now you are retreating from it comparing plyometrics to CAM. I did not say how they compare, I mearly pointed out that heavy lifing can produce improvements in the rate of force development.

Here is what you said:

the studies i have read show that training adaptations are velocity specific... changing the training protocol should also change the effects of the training...

Ido Portal wrote:The rate of force development can be effected with heavy lifting, as long as you try to accelerate the load during the concentric phase as fast as possible. Even if it moves slowly, but the intention and the neural drive is maximal, you will effect the rate of force development factor.

this is an interesting concept... unfortunately i have never seen a study investigating this...

You asked for a study, I presented one.

Also, the use of plyometrics against cam training is to be determent by the type of athlete/musculature in question. A more elastic factors talented person vs a more strength talented person, etc... It is not a question which is better, but better when.

(Although this is out of the scope of the original discussion)

Now, concerning the decceleration phase of the lift - this has nothing to do with rate of force development. Also, there are methods that can resolve this problem with heavy training. Many methods.

i do not doubt that compensatory acceleration training will produce increases in strength and power

And here you agree with my first point in question - cam training will improve POWER. Hence its effect on the rate of force development.

Ido.

Ido Portal said:

I do agree with the need to combine faster, more explosive and dynamic work, but with some athletes and some sports, that is mainly taken care of with the sport itself. It is important, then, that the work in the weight room becomes more maximal effort, in a try to maximize results and best use your training time.

Ido.

This is an interesting point. I've been curious whether plyometric work is a nessacary supplement to Thai boxing (as well as the maximal strength work) when all bag/pad work is explosive in nature itself. I curious what catagory of training martial arts would be classed under; plyometrics, cardio, or a mix of both? I mean all movments (with the exeption of beginers where techinique is stressed) have power/speed as a priority.

Any thoughts?

Longshanks said:

Ido Portal said:

I do agree with the need to combine faster, more explosive and dynamic work, but with some athletes and some sports, that is mainly taken care of with the sport itself. It is important, then, that the work in the weight room becomes more maximal effort, in a try to maximize results and best use your training time.

Ido.

This is an interesting point. I've been curious whether plyometric work is a nessacary supplement to Thai boxing (as well as the maximal strength work) when all bag/pad work is explosive in nature itself. I curious what catagory of training martial arts would be classed under; plyometrics, cardio, or a mix of both? I mean all movments (with the exeption of beginers where techinique is stressed) have power/speed as a priority.

Any thoughts?

Martials Arts can be a mixture of different qualities. MA's always have a speed/power component with a cardiovascular component determined by the duration/time intervals. Grappling arts add in more maximal strength, especially isometric.

Oh they absolutely help, but it's hard to do. Switch kicks are probably the closest round kicking plyometric you can do without a machine. Depth jumps and senders are great, they help develop the teep. Obviously we didn't call them senders, but it was a similar circuit of plyo jumps.

Like Ido said, sometimes a lot of plyometric work ends up being part of the sport's practice. You end up doing a lot of plyometric work just kicking pads and throwing punch combinations, but some specific plyo work with resistance implements could be incredibly productive. Because so much plyometric work is a part of most partial(Edit: Wolf totlly PWNED me on this... ) arts training, nonplyometric reactive training, which is essentially altitude drops, would probably be the most useful addition to a martial artist's regimen.

Impulse training would be incredibly useful for Muay Thai and most any other martial art. Look up "impulse trainer" on youtube for videos of this machine and training examples.

While I do not want to call attention to a typing error, the term "partial arts" does seem appropriate to some of the "martial" arts that I have done and seen. Given my mediocre fighting ability, I am now going to refer to myself as a partial artist. However, I will need to do separate plyometric work, to balance all the sitting I do at work.

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

Nice!

I kind of don't want to correct myself now!

Lemme throw this out there:

I'm not claiming to brag, but I can punch pretty fast. My arm endurance is low, about 25-30 push ups, and I can only bench somewhere over 100 (tendonitis stopped me, never tested max). I know benching and push ups don't have everything to do with punching, but from a weightlifting perspective, my speed doesn't make sense with the numbers I have. Could someone explain this to me?

Sure. Speed has very little to do with strength. Speed has 50% to do with Power. Power = force x acceleration or velocity, depending on whether you're looking at rate of development or the output at any particular instant.

Speed is all about being able to relax the antagonists and contract the agonists as quickly as possible.

You can be insanely fast and be strong as well. Bruce Lee was an excellent example of this.

Your ability to resist gravity has very little to do with how fast or slow you can move your arm, because your arm is so damn light that even at top speed you're not working against enough inertia to challenge your strength. It's that simple.

Wolf with one Ear said:

While I do not want to call attention to a typing error, the term "partial arts" does seem appropriate to some of the "martial" arts that I have done and seen. Given my mediocre fighting ability, I am now going to refer to myself as a partial artist. However, I will need to do separate plyometric work, to balance all the sitting I do at work.

LOL. I completley agree. Theres far too many 'partial arts' around nower days that the realy ones tend to get much less respect. I always refer to kickboxing as the diet coke version of Muay Thai. I once told someone I'm a Thai-boxing instructor to which they asked is that the same as Thai-bo? F***ing aerobics? Are you kidding? Sorry to rant but it realy ruffles my feathers that kinda thing.

Seiji said:

Could someone explain this to me?

to add to what slizzardman said, being able to move a limb quickly is of little importance. What matters is how much force you would deliver with that punch. Anyone can move their arms around really fast. This is why plyometric pushups would be a better guauge of your power, since considerable resistance must be overcome at maximal speed - recruiting as much muscle fibers in as short a time as possible.

I think most of the power would actually come from the hips and torso as well, but im not really educated in such things.

You can calculate the force of impact by taking the hand speed and multiplying that by the force exerted in the punching position. You'll need a force plate, unfortunately, to figure that one out!

There are a lot of factors that play into punching power, and speed is only part of the picture. Having the joints in line, relative to the arc of the punch at impact, is really most of the picture. Even a somewhat slow punch can stun someone when everything is lined up correctly, because nearly all of the force gets passed from fist to face. Bad alignment causes frce to get absorbed by the arm, much like a shock absorber handles the bumps on the road.

This gets tricky, and is why very, very few people actually know how to throw a truly devastating uppercut or hook. Those are very technical punches, and done right they really don't require that much effort to wreck someone with.

Just don't take these explanations literally when implementing them with strength training. Speed is a very important factor and has major transferability to real life applications of that strength.

Oh, absolutely! Speed is king in athletics.