Preventing Adaptation to Exercise

When people think of exercise selection and program modification, many will default to changing the entire exercise. While this is one method of modification, there are some issues with this method. For one, many athletes or lifters have no business constantly switching the exercise because, in many cases, they are not performing the movements with enough efficiency to warrant new movements. It really doesn’t make much sense to change the exercise and throw in something new only to perform another exercise incorrectly.

Another consideration to make is that changing the tempo at which an exercise is performed can alter the training effect of a movement. In addition, this is a smart choice to help teach movements in pieces and to help correct technical errors—not to mention the positive benefits of emphasizing yielding or isometric contractions at various points in the movement. With this in mind, the exercise can serve multiple purposes while still contributing to technical efficiency and motor learning.

This article will take a look at this idea. While no exact training programs will be listed, guidelines for using this consideration will be provided in sample weeks.

Tool Analogy, and Its Flaws…

Exercise selection is often compared to tools in a toolbox. Many people will think that the more choices you have, the better you can attack the task at hand. I am not necessarily an opponent of this concept and think variation is something that has its merits. However, this analogy has its flaws.

First, let's think of what the task might be. Many sports have a variety of needs and will generally have a large amount of tasks that the training process should aim to address. Thus, with these types of sports, there will be many more components that will probably require many more “tools.” However, in sports that have a very limited set of skills and outcomes, the amount of tools does not necessarily need to be so high. If we look at powerlifting, for example, the tools needed are mostly forms of lifting weights (whether that be with barbells, dumbbells, machines, etc.). The tasks involved have very clear outcomes, as it is a closed skill set involved. While there are numerous approaches available to accomplish the end goal—lifting in a competition that also displays an increase in the amount of weight lifted, we also have to consider what the most efficient approach is.

Many people will automatically default to using all of the tools they have at their disposal, sometimes even changing the tools every single training session. However, let’s look at the tool analogy from a construction or mechanical standpoint and see how inefficient this might be. If we have a carpenter who only needs to drive nails to complete the task, his tool of choice will either be a hammer or a nail gun. Let’s say, however, that for whatever reason he changes this out every time he goes to drive a nail. Either out of a lack of confidence in his choice or out of boredom, he starts to use as many tools as he can in his toolbox to see if it will accomplish the task of the hammer or nail gun. This becomes wildly inefficient since some of these tools do not have any relevance to the task.

Let’s also venture to say that our carpenter doesn't have any amount of mastery using the hammer or nail gun. He is inconsistent at best and tries to focus on either just getting the nail to go in or attempts to do everything quickly, focusing on the quantity of work as opposed to correctly using the tools he has. In this case, he may need to focus on slowing down and doing the job correctly, or possibly correcting a specific segment of his technique when using the tools. It isn't the tool that needs work but the operator who needs to become better at using it.

This example is not that different from exercises. Many times, people will change the movements for an entirely different exercise when, in reality, the same exercise can be used but with varying tempos or loading protocols. Progressing through a training cycle doesn't necessarily require completely changing the exercise to avoid accommodation. By changing the tempos or emphasis on different types of contractions, the movement can serve different purposes.

Practical application

When looking at the idea at play, something that we are discussing is the use of slow yields or isometric holds to change the exercise without using a different movement. The use of slow yielding contractions and isometrics has been covered in many articles on this site and elsewhere; in the works of authors such as Dietz, Verkhoshansky, and Siff; and so on. I would encourage anyone who is interested in this subject to read Triphasic Training, Supertraining, Special Strength Training Manual for Coaches, and other similar books as they cover this science in great detail. There are also posts on the Q & A by Buddy “Coach X” Morris that talk about the use of different contractions and their application. The aim here isn’t to go over the science behind this but rather to provide a practical application of modification that may fit into sample weeks in a training cycle. This is something I have either used myself or with other lifters. I am not going to list exact exercises but rather provide a few options for each movement that could work. This is a volume-based block approach with a relatively high amount of volume. I would not necessarily take this as something to attempt to copy, but I would use it as a platform off which you base ideas and critically think.

Think about why these types of exercises would be used. Many people have issues with the lowering of weights in the squat and bench press. By slowing down the movement and focusing on decelerating the load, the greater the potential of absorbing force when transitioning back to performing the movements at a normal rate of speed. By focusing on the isometric in the hole or on the chest, the greater the ability to stop and reverse the weight in an opposite direction. This can also strengthen weak points in the movement and be adapted to any portion of the lift that the individual chooses. In the program below, yielding isometrics are used but overcoming isometrics (pushing or pulling into an immovable support or partner resistance) could be substituted.

Blocks and Exercise Choices

In this sample, I am using the basic principles of a block approach while utilizing higher frequencies. The blocks listed would be A (accumulation), B (transmutation), and C (realization). In each block, a basic menu of exercises are used. These can be modified, but in this example, whatever exercises are used in A blocks will be used in every A block. In turn, exercises used in B blocks will be used in every B block. The only difference is that the tempo will be altered in each block. The C block is the realization/taper and will only be performed at the conclusion of the entire program.

Exercise selection during the A blocks will be larger and will aim to satisfy a larger amount of goals that can include both work capacity as well as hypertrophy if this is desired. More isolation work for training the muscle is used at this time as opposed to training movements.

During the B blocks, isolation work will be waived out with an emphasis on training movements. More compound exercises will be used and the focus will be on technical efficiency and working the lifts in either competition form or closely related variations.

I am also choosing to only display one week of each block since progression will depend on a lot of factors. Within each block, this can be done by either accumulating volume or accumulating intensity while dropping volume. Generally, during the early phases of training, the volume will accumulate. Then, as the meet approaches, it will decrease while the intensity accumulates. However, with different individuals having different approaches, I am not going to write out an entire program as it may not be appropriate for each individual.

Program Menu

It is important to remember that this is written in generalities. The volume of work would need to be adjusted to fit the needs of the individual, as well as any prehab work or specific choices in the movements used. I did not choose to include prehab work here, but it would be for areas such as the scapula, rotator cuff, knees, hips, etc. This will, however, give an insight into modification over the course of a training cycle while still keeping enough exposure to movements to promote motor learning and technical efficiency. Also, for the sake of correct interpretation, the following tempo listings need to be explained.

With each exercise, a listing will appear as follows:

Y/S/O/E

Y equals the yield of the movement, S equals the stretched range of the movement, O equals the overcoming portion, and E equals the end range. So, with a listing of 6/0/X/0, the movement would have a six-second yield, no isometric hold in the stretched range, an explosive overcoming phase, and no iso hold in the end range. If the listing is 1/3/X/0, the movement would have a one-second yield, a three-second isometric hold in the stretched range, an explosive overcoming phase, and no hold in the end range.

Block A2

(Yield emphasis, sample week)

Block B1

(Yield emphasis)

Notes: The yielding phase of the training cycle would generally last between four to six weeks. This would include two to three weeks of A1, two to three weeks of B1, and then an optional deload after completion of B1. With bench press, a one-second isometric is included on the chest to mimic the press call. While some people may think that yielding on deadlifting does not make sense, the idea here is to overload the working muscles on the six-second phase. Also, for the main movements during block A1, reps are kept to three or less per set for energy expenditure. However, on the other movements this has not been programmed as some of the aim of the example block A1 is to lengthen time under tension and induce hypertrophy. In block B1, the first movement is done with competition form and no slow yields. The aim here is to practice the movement at the pace that will be used in competition. Other movements feature the slow yields.

Block A2

(Isometric emphasis, sample week)

Block B2

(Isometric emphasis)

Notes: The isometric phase of the training cycle would generally last between four to six weeks. This would include two to three weeks of A2, two to three weeks of B1, and then an optional deload after completion of B2. Again, for the main movements during block A2, reps are kept to three or less per set for energy expenditure, and the idea here is to not break in technique. However, on the other movements this has not been programmed as some of the aim of the example block A1 is to lengthen time under tension and induce hypertrophy. In block B1, the first movement is done with competition form and no isometric holds. The aim here is to practice the movement at the pace that will be used in competition. Other movements feature the isometric holds. With the deadlift, the goal is to train the lifter to maintain body position after breaking the bar off the floor. This is why the three-second isometric is held at a position just below the knee. However, some people may choose to perform this lift only to this range and set the bar back to the floor, or change this to an overcoming isometric and pull statically into a fixed apparatus such as a rack.

Options after this

After completing the second B block, a few choices can be made. Another A block and B block could be performed with the same exercise choices, but now with regular tempos of 1/0/X/0 (or in case of the bench 1/1/X/0). Another option would be to continue with third B block of two to three weeks in duration, and then begin the taper (C block). A third option would be to directly transition into a C block and taper, then head to a meet or test day. All of this is specific to the individual and also has to do with how much time is available in reference to the beginning of the training cycle and the meet. The general recommendation is that each block lasts between two to six weeks. However, in the set up, it may be most advantageous to limit lengths of each block to two to three weeks.

An alternative may be to perform six weeks of an A block broken into two-week segments. This would first include a yielding focus (two weeks), then an isometric focus (two weeks), then a focus on the overcoming with regular tempos (two weeks) immediately followed by a B block broken into two-week segments as listed above. The only downside is that recovery may become an issue for some lifters. In this case, a period of decreased loading may be inserted as needed.

Conclusion

The idea here is to use the same movements throughout a training cycle, but to alter the way they are performed to prevent accommodation after a certain number of weeks. This still allows some element of motor learning and technical efficiency to be practiced, but it also targets different contractions and trains the movements with attention paid to their separate parts.

Even those who differ in opinion from this approach can find usefulness in this idea. This will give those who want more tools in the toolbox more variation that they can use on a number of movements.