Quote:
|
That's what i'm trying to get at: why 3 in particular for normal people?
|
because you will be recovered from the previous session in tems of glycogen and microtrauma before the next session. I don't know how to say any clearer than that.
If a person is doing additional stuff that always have to be considered in the recovery time and if that is insufficient you have to modify.
mc, there is no universal rule that everybody can follow. In the planning of training you have to consider a ton of variables which can differ between people so of course an athlete training 10 hrs per week for some other sport has a different recovey strategy than a person only doing 3 sessions of 30-40 min. per week.- it goes without saying. you also have to consider that rotation of volume can go a long way. I know several athletes that rotate volume for their recovery instead of dropping the intensity. my athletes is one example and if my memory serves me correctly this is also a strategy used by eastern european weightlifters...
A recommendation of 3-4 sessions of MVO2 is based on 1) the time it takes for glycogen replentishment, 2) microtrauma recovery (heart and muscle tissue) 3) volume is rotated or backed off occasionally 4) feedback from the athlete donig the work- if he/she feels fatigued then back off regardless of what your "plan" tells you to.
Like i told you before in an Email: "S&C is just as much an ART as it is a science."
for instance Mark O. Madsen the olympic wrestler I coached only did 1-2 MVO2 snatch sessions per week but he also had about 10 hrs of S&C + 15-20 hrs of wrestling to do every week. The goal here is of course to make him better on the mat and not better at MVO2 snatches and if I had had him do 4 sessions of MVO2 snatches per week· his wrestling trainnig would have suffered. but again this is not a "normal" persons training. A person with no other extra strenous activities can easily benefit from 3-4 sessions of the MVO2.
Everything you have your clients do has to be related to them and not just a universal guideline.
Quote:
|
ight. this is your hypothesis then: that the ingress and egress of blood through the heart is sufficiently fast for stretching not thickening. it's not an hypothesis you've tested in your work is it? or is it that any pumping will definitely effect this er effect?
|
No, kb snatches does both does both that is the hypothesis. this is based what is clinically proven with rowers and the comparison of the physiological and biomechanical analysis of the similarities and differences to the kb snatch. There is not enough material in this subject to run a full experiment when you have such a close link between the mechanics of snatches and rowing.
the rapid execution of a row in an ergometer vs. high candence kb snatches:
1) there is enough muscle mass involved in both to have the potential to reach MVO2
2) the cycle of one rep is fast enough to allow high blood perfusion rate for both
3) the breathing rhytm is physiological rather than anatomical for both- meaning that the body is pressureized during the most strenous effort- valsalva manouver (causing the thickining of the heart- concentric hypertrophy)
/KJ