Integrated training vs seperated static work

In the book Coach writes about integrated training, and states "This is by far the most effective of all of the strength training protocols discussed to date" (p178)

I changed to this about two months ago, and like it a lot. But as I am an person that always like to know "why", I have a few questions:)

Why is it so effective to integrate the FSP in the FBE? Does it have something to do with blood flow?

I've been reading a lot on this forum, looking trough posts and training logs. Also I have tried searching for "integrated" but could not find much. My impression is that it is most common to first do the FSP, then the FBE. So why is not integrated training used more?

Anyone?

Not only interested to hear from the experts. I am also curios to hear from anyone that have chosen integrated or "separated" static training. As to why you have chosen one over the other.

Hi,

I would add whatever insight I had on the subject if I had any at all but unfortunately, I'm not familiar with your topic. I'm sure somebody will come along who is more educated and help you out.

Very recently I was looking on this forum for people’s experience with integrated training, but, as you wrote, there’s not a lot to be found. Even though coach describes it as “by far the most effective of all strength training protocols discussed to dateâ€, very few (or none?) seem to follow it. And all advice regarding FSPs seems to be “First FSPs, then FBEsâ€.

I know that in the WODs, every 6th workout is an integrated training, but that’s just once every six workouts. So coach is not really following it either. Apart from that, the structure of the WODs doesn’t quite fit with the template described in the integrated training section.

During my search, I found the following post where Joshua Naterman talks about integrated training:

http://mail.gymnasticbodies.com/forum/v ... =13&t=2812

He explains that it’s not for beginners and that it doesn’t work for everyone and that you need to find what works best for you.

I decided to give it a try for a few weeks. I did all exercises (4FSP+4FBE, 8 in total) one after the other as one giant set and then repeat that for three rounds.

The good thing about it was that for pushing and pulling exercises, the accompanying FSP had some sort of a “warm up†effect for me. The FBE seemed to go easier. FL combined with legs didn’t offer any advantages/disadvantages I think, while combining an L-sit variant with core work seemed to have a negative impact on my core exercise. For instance, after doing a 15sec adv. L-Sit, I wasn’t able to do L-sit lifts as high as I could compared to when I didn’t do integrated training. Of course, I have to say that I only did integrated training for a couple of weeks, so this might have improved after a while.

It also had an impact on my total workout time. It increased by around 10 minutes because I required longer resting periods compared to performing all FSPs separately from the FBEs.

The program I was following before I tried integrated training consisted out of 4 different training days (MTTS), where on tuesday I would only do core&leg exercises. No FSPs, no arms. I considered tuesday as a resting day for my arms and I felt I needed that. With the integrated training approach I was training arms every workout and I started feeling that some old injuries were getting ready to show up again.

I went back to my old program, separating the FSP & FBE, for the reasons mentioned above: shorter workout time, less interference with my core exercises and avoiding getting injured.

Actually my old program was quite good for me and I made good progress with it, but I wanted to change some exercises. That’s when I decided to read the programming part in the btgb book again, which made me try integrated training. I’m now back to my old program with some small modifications.