I must confess I was just recently converted into using isometric protocols first for my training sessions and later for athletes. I do know ISOs exist from a stone age but I was somehow reluctant to use them as I didn’t want to look like Charles Atlas from the early 20th century.
Must admit I used to think ISO’s don’t have a place in this modern time! How wrong was I. Ronnie Coleman would say: “Yeah baby”.
There are plenty of tips out there on how to plan and progress your training sessions. Based on different variables and theories.
If I can be a bit sarcastic, then majority of them is based on what the coaches/athletes are seining it on a YouTube (Facebook and Instagram too). I named this “YouTube periodisation”. Don’t lough, this is real deal and I am sure this is most used periodisation scheme these days. All the other ways of planning are way behind this one. Who cares for block, linear, undulating, conjugate, top to bottom approach, whatever named periodisation if he/she can easily access YouTube from anywhere on the world and just watch new exercise and add it to our plan.
Recently I posted about my training on social media and I got a few questions about it. So here it is in more detail.
I am known as a numbers coach and trying to be based on science. But I admit, I rose up through “bro-science” and I don’t think that is all that bad. Let me explain “bro-science”: somebody is performing one type of athletic training, let’s just say lifting in a gym, and he is doing a workout that is known just to him. At, the end of some period, he got some positive results out of it (No shit, it happens) and he claims that this is THE workout, and he is the special one among all the others.
As many of you know, a few days ago I was on a lecture by dr. Mujika from Spain. He prefers to be acknowledged as Basque. Professor who introduced him to us, said that he was asking a lot of questions regarding the independence of Slovenia during the ride from airport to faculty.
We coaches test our athletes and on those values we’re planning their training scheme for a micro, macro, or whatever cycle. We have one plan and we’re happy with it. We’re hoping that is enough!
My opinion from the real world is that is not near enough.
and what science has to say about this…?
Continuing from my previous article on Unstable Surface Training (UST) (Click for Part 1 of this series) with practical applications as myself serving as test subject. In this second part, I have looked towards what science has to say on this controversial topic at hand!
Citius, Altius, Fortius is an Olympic motto that mean faster, higher, stronger. There is hidden meaning of why and how to train. We should strive for getting stronger, faster and jump higher to get better.
