“Misusing variation [in training] can ultimately hinder a lifter’s progress”
Variation in training variables is one of the most debated topics in sports due to how it impacts the success of the athlete.
In strength training, variation is used for every imaginable variable: volume, intensity, exercise selection, rest periods, and training split selection. Basically, the possibilities to add variation are endless.
When we boil it down, variation is time and size-dependent. That means:
- How LARGE is the change from point A to B
- How MUCH TIME passed between points A and B
The possibilities of variation are endless, as much as the complexity of the program you are building with it.
The case for variability has always been pushed by certain people and organizations in the fitness industry.
The artifact of variation is, that it creates something new, and generally, new things can be sold better than already known things.
Misusing variation can ultimately hinder a lifter’s progress, as this often leads to unnecessary complexity. When variation is leaned on repeatedly without need, it is simply being employed to generate artificial newness. This overcomplication often clouds the lifter’s ability to see patterns in our chosen training variables and the outcome measures of interest. If we cannot see what is working, we cannot accurately adjust the program for the lifter’s success in the future.
Variation itself is by no means responsible for progress: it is simply a tool to support your training program. To think of it another way, wanting to split your meals into 5 days per week would be meaningless without any food to eat. If your training protocol is not solid, there is no reason to add variation.
Therefore, when there is a need for variability, it should be used with the intention of: “as little as necessary to justify its needs”.
The most elemental variable in your training program is the training stress it imposes on you. Keeping with the prior analogy, it is the food you eat.
Simply put, you can think of training stress as the amount of volume (number of sets) and intensity for each respective set (RIR or RPE).
Training stress increases linearly with more sets and exponentially with higher RPEs.
For more details look up Robert Fredericks’s amazing article: http://www.strongur.io/monitoring-training-stress-with-exertion-load/
and his follow up article:
http://www.strongur.io/using-exertion-load-to-predict-metabolic-stress/
All strength athletes usually share the goal of getting bigger and stronger. Because of this, it is usually accompanied by the necessity to increase the stimulus over the short, medium, and long term.
After the initial training stage as a beginner, most athletes have a cyclical variation in training stress over the short term (microcycle), medium-term (mesocycle), and the long term (macrocycle).
Short-term cyclical variation is often necessary to account for inconsistent life effects, enhance recovery abilities, and time management.
Long-term variation in training stress can be based on many factors such as goals, life circumstances, occasionally injuries, and progressive growth.
Medium-term variation is where we will spend the most time.
This type of variation in training stress often boils down to three ideas:
- Our body’s ability to withstand stress is higher in the short term rather than in the long term. This leads to fatigue accumulation over time. This is especially true the more advanced we get, usually requiring greater disruptions in the body’s homeostasis.
- Our body becomes desensitized to the stimulus, requiring a higher stimulus over time
- The “Repeated Bout Effect” affects our ability to increase work capacity throughout the training block with a lower risk of muscle damage.
There is some mechanistic literature showing the desensitization of key mechanistic anabolic signaling proteins after only a short amount of time (Ogasawara et al., 2013).
Furthermore, most people notice that their ability to withstand training stress on week one of their new training block is less pronounced than in the middle of the end of the block.
However, I see two malpractices when programming the correct training stress at present time:
- The variation in stress from the first week to the last week of the mesocycle is way too large (adding too many sets and/or increasing the RPE too much)
- Training stress selection of each mesocycle is completely theoretical and goes too far in the future
Let’s dive into each.
“The variation in stress from the first week to the last week of the mesocycle is way too large.”
Adding sets and increasing RPE multiplies the training stress. If you increase both variables too much, the training stress is either way too low in the beginning, or way too high in the end. Either way: this leads you to a suboptimal training response.
Instead, I would recommend finding the training stress which works well for you and your life circumstances now.
Once this is established, you can decrease training stress initially to account for the missing repeated bout effect as well as the high training sensitivity. Then you can increase sets and/or RPE over time.
With these increases, we need to be patient, methodological, and gentle. After all, nobody needs a 50% in stress within 5 weeks, regardless of the increase in work capacity and stress tolerance. Increasing training stress this much is usually a result of being “greedy,” a poorly chosen beginning program, and a poor understanding of programming.
A good general rule is a total of 20-25% stress increase within your mesocycle.
If you change only your sets, that equates to the same 20-25%.
This becomes a bit more difficult when we change the RPE.
If you increase your mean RPE from 7 to 8 or 8 to 9, you may only need 5-10% of training volume (sets) from the beginning to the end of your training cycle.
Now onto the second point: “Training stress selection of each mesocycle is completely theoretical and goes too far in the future”
It is important to listen to your intuition and subjective feedback. If your training feels too easy in the beginning? It probably is. The same is true for the end of your block.
If you preplan your entire mesocycle, a huge part of the data will be missing for you as you cannot see into the future.
We can possibly predict it, but there is no true way of knowing.
Therefore, as much as you want to keep your training stress constant from block to block, sometimes you need to adjust.
Instead when programming, combine reasonable planning with present intuition. If we cling to a plan or numbers we were supposed to hit that day, it will almost never make you a better athlete—it will just make you static.
Life is change. Your training is no different.
So when do we actually program variation? When the circumstances call for it. Let variation be a consequence of your body’s ability to change instead of something to be forced.
It will appear naturally—you just need to listen.
References:
Ogasawara, R., Kobayashi, K., Tsutaki, A., Lee, K., Abe, T., Fujita, S., Nakazato, K., & Ishii, N. (2013). mTOR signaling response to resistance exercise is altered by chronic resistance training and detraining in skeletal muscle. Journal of applied physiology (Bethesda, Md. : 1985), 114(7), 934–940. https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.01161.2012
