W
WB3
Guest
The idea at working at a lower capacity to achieve the same thing is valid, in a sense, but I still think the focus for the Wallabies should be increasing their max strength in the off-season and increasing their capacity to work under maximal loads in the season. (So, in a sense we are agreeing).
For instance - players should be working on increasing their max squats and DLs and the like (after an initial hypertrophy-specific program) in the off season, and during the pre-season begin to focus more on the development of speed under heavy loads and an increasing capability to work with increased density. For example, they should be able to perform 3 repetitions of 85% 1RM with decreasing rest times, or even better with an active recovery. That simulates the game - periods of max effort interspersed with lighter work. Anaerobic conditioning, as you said, is the basis for an improved ability to perform maximal efforts with limited rest - however there are studies that demonstrate the link between aerobic capacity and the ability to resynthesise CP and also to flush out lactic acid, meaning that I don't think aerobic training should be disregarded.
Ultimately, if the Wallabies are able to perform the same task whilst only recruiting 60% of their max strength (as you suggested was possible in your example) then that would lead to a greater ability to repeat these efforts, that is true, but maximum strength gains do not come quickly or in large amounts, thus a mixture of conditioning to increase work capacity at higher loads interspersed with training focused on increasing maximum strength would be most valid. Again this is (as you acknowledged) subject to their training load. Max strength training in and of itself is not overly fatiguing (there is less DOMS, typically, than volume training and the body quickly recovers - I don't mean to contradict myself; the need to recover is perhaps too much for the in-season schedule to accomodate) but the gains from strength work are made during recovery time, not the session itself and thus without adequate rest gains will be marginal at best. The Sydney Uni examples you gave me are phenomenal, but also seem to be exceptional (and the example with Jerry Y does not NECESSARILY translate to increased max strength - but that he was adequately recovered to perform such a feat is incredible. However, it could be that his initial 300kg box squat was limited by fatigue itself, who knows?).
What would provide a lot of clarity in this discussion would be a sample Wallabies training program - it is no use analysing the hypothetical. I simply can't see them doing anything blatantly useless (although my faith wavers).
That the Crusaders were using strongman training does not surprise me in the slightest. Their conditioning was phenomenally ahead of its time.
For instance - players should be working on increasing their max squats and DLs and the like (after an initial hypertrophy-specific program) in the off season, and during the pre-season begin to focus more on the development of speed under heavy loads and an increasing capability to work with increased density. For example, they should be able to perform 3 repetitions of 85% 1RM with decreasing rest times, or even better with an active recovery. That simulates the game - periods of max effort interspersed with lighter work. Anaerobic conditioning, as you said, is the basis for an improved ability to perform maximal efforts with limited rest - however there are studies that demonstrate the link between aerobic capacity and the ability to resynthesise CP and also to flush out lactic acid, meaning that I don't think aerobic training should be disregarded.
Ultimately, if the Wallabies are able to perform the same task whilst only recruiting 60% of their max strength (as you suggested was possible in your example) then that would lead to a greater ability to repeat these efforts, that is true, but maximum strength gains do not come quickly or in large amounts, thus a mixture of conditioning to increase work capacity at higher loads interspersed with training focused on increasing maximum strength would be most valid. Again this is (as you acknowledged) subject to their training load. Max strength training in and of itself is not overly fatiguing (there is less DOMS, typically, than volume training and the body quickly recovers - I don't mean to contradict myself; the need to recover is perhaps too much for the in-season schedule to accomodate) but the gains from strength work are made during recovery time, not the session itself and thus without adequate rest gains will be marginal at best. The Sydney Uni examples you gave me are phenomenal, but also seem to be exceptional (and the example with Jerry Y does not NECESSARILY translate to increased max strength - but that he was adequately recovered to perform such a feat is incredible. However, it could be that his initial 300kg box squat was limited by fatigue itself, who knows?).
What would provide a lot of clarity in this discussion would be a sample Wallabies training program - it is no use analysing the hypothetical. I simply can't see them doing anything blatantly useless (although my faith wavers).
That the Crusaders were using strongman training does not surprise me in the slightest. Their conditioning was phenomenally ahead of its time.
