Beware: Nomenclature Lies Ahead

Understanding training organization is the biggest sticking point for many lifters because:

  • General terminology must be adapted to a ton of sports; at the same time, unique methods (and resulting terms) must be developed for each sport and variation within that sport.
  • Training research and methods are international, and flavored by thousands of coaches from dozens of countries, and with works translated by various authors in various languages with varying degrees of accuracy.
  • Even within the same language, coaches need to differentiate their ideas (or, more cynically, come up with marketing gimmicks, discredit/steal the work of others, and profit off of the unwitting), which leads to one thing having a million names.

You might remember a grade school teacher instructing you to use the “Five W’s and an H” rule during a newspaper-writing assignment.  At the risk of bringing on an unfortunate flashback, let’s use the same structure of “who, what, when, where, why, and how?” to look at factors in organizing training.

  • Who is training? For the experienced, knowledgeable lifter, this is an easy one.  For the S&C coach of a major university, it’s a little trickier.
  • What is done during training? Specific exercises, techniques, and the level of work done with each, or means, methods, loads, and rest, if you’re reading Soviet-influenced texts.
  • When are certain activities performed? Exercises are scheduled in the extreme short-term (within a training session), all the way up to months or even years of training (between major competitive events).
  • Where is the training held? Another issue that’s more important with large groups of athletes, though location and associated resources can subtly influence training.
  • Why is the training structured in a particular way? To meet the personal goals of a recreational lifter, or the demands of sport in a competitive athlete.
  • How are these elements brought together? Through a comprehensive plan or training system.

Let’s look more at the issues of what, when, why, and how as they pertain to a training system.

Training Systems

Your plan to improve athletically is your training system.  Written down, a training system would reflect the core training principles that guide the bulk of your lifting.  Systems have existed for as long as training has been around, going back past the days of circus strongmen, farther back than the first Greek Olympians, to ancient Chinese, Egyptian, and other cultures.  A rough example of a modern system might be:

A full system has an ultimate goal (winning competitions in this case), methods (competition-specific lifts, ME, DE, and rep work, accommodating resistance, etc.), a plan for individual sessions (ME/DE upper and lower days), and some sort of forward-thinking view (here, volume is meant to increase over a lifter’s career, and the training methods change as the lifter nears meets).

A more detailed system plan could drill down into each workout session[i], though there are a few commonalities that hold true for most systems: the more important and/or demanding activities are placed at the beginning of the session when the athlete is fresh[ii]; the exercises used will mimic completion in some way, or indirectly aid an athlete’s preparation; and rest periods will match the intensity of an activity.  The primary activities of a session (in a lifter’s case, simply lifting weights) are generally bracketed by a preparatory portion (a warm-up) and a restorative portion (a cool-down); the lifter might prepare with dynamic mobility drills and restore with gentle stretching or relaxation techniques.  The methods involved in a session are generally limited in most systems in order to reduce fatigue and emphasize a particular quality; as an example, a lifter generally won’t train with maximal effort, dynamic effort, reps and reps to failure, isometric, and strength endurance skills all in the same session.

From a broader perspective, a training system manipulates positive and negative adaptations in the lifter’s favor.  Adaptations to a particular method of athletic training generally take between several weeks and several months to peak or solidify.  For this reason, the most important structural elements of a training system often acknowledge this broad adaptation window, which is why major shifts in systems often occur every few weeks or months.  One example would be how Westside rotates ME lifts to address this factor, while another would be bodybuilders changing exercises to offset stagnation every month or so.

System Types

Note in the Westside system how the various methods of gaining strength repeat within the adaptation window, as the four unique sessions generally occur within the same week.  This means that basically all of a lifter’s needed athletic abilities are trained at the same time.  The opposite of this would be a system that focuses on one method during the adaptation window before switching to another.

This leads us to two different approaches to training systems, which the Russians have kindly labeled for us.  Training systems like Westside that train multiple abilities in similar ratios over time are often called by names such as parallel, concurrent, or complex systems.  Systems that focus on a few skills at a time in great depth before moving on to other skills are often called block, coupled, conjugate,[iii]or coupled-successive systems.   Depending on the context and author, there are subtle differences between even the most similar of these systems: don’t assume that one article’s discussion of a coupled system is the same as a different book’s conjugated system.  I’ll use “parallel” and “block” to make things easier to remember.

The truth is that just about all training systems fall somewhere between the two extremes.  To beat our example into the ground, the Westside system is a parallel system because it trains for maximal strength, hypertrophy, explosive strength, and GPP all at once.  On the other hand, during periods like circa-maximal phases (which are essentially comparable to a traditional “peaking phase”) Westside takes up aspects of a block system.  During a circa-max phase, most of the lifter’s time and focus are spent on increasing intensity in maximal strength work in order to prepare specifically for an upcoming meet; the fact that this phase is attached or “coupled” to the prior training style shows how the name originated.  The fact that it’s a separate portion of training shows why phases like a circa-max are also called training “blocks.”

To get around gray areas, a system is usually defined by what it emphasizes most.  Westside is focused mostly on parallel aspects, so it’s called a parallel system.  The division between these two basic types of systems evolved for a variety of reasons, though two factors are the biggest.  First, sports require a variety of skills that all demand some sort of training.  Second, athletes of varying skill and experience react in different ways to different systems.  We’ll talk more about these factors in Part IV.

Work and Specificity

The circa-maximal phase also highlights a few more factors in developing a system.  A system generally arranges and changes exercises in one of two ways.  It either modifies work performed in a given time frame, or changes exercises to be more or less like competitive activities.  We talked a great deal about methods of gaining strength in Part II using various lifts and exercises as examples, and noted how their use can be defined by how much work goes into them, i.e., by volume, intensity, and duration.  The work an athlete performs can vary between sessions and over longer periods of time, with volume and intensity being the most commonly used factors.

A changing element in a training plan—or progression—is generally named after how it appears if you lay it out on a graph.  When a quality increases or decreases over time in what appears to be a fairly straight, angled line, it is said to be a linear progression.  Anything else can be lumped into the larger category of non-linear progression, which has its own categories that include the following:  gentle rising and falling elements are called undulating or wave progressions, steeper progressions are called pyramids, while sharply-alternating, peaked charts indicate a pendulum progression.  A random or jumbled progression usually indicates a lack of thoughtful planning or cocaine abuse.

In the chart below, you’ll see a linear progression at the top and an undulating progression at the bottom, with volume used as the example work quality.

In the linear progression, training volume increases over time; in strength training, this would usually happen by adding extra sets and reps to exercises performed during a session, or simply by adding extra sessions.  In the undulating progression, volume goes up and down over time.  It’s important to remember that these progression lines are generalizations of trends, in this case points of data from each training session.   In the linear example, volume might increase by 10% one session, 3% the next, and 15% on the third.  As long as the increase is continuous, it’s considered linear.

Different techniques can be used simultaneously within a training system.  One element in a system may undulate during a training week or month, but when viewed at a distance, the undulations may smooth out so that the program actually progresses linearly over the span of several months.  If you pull your view back further, that same system could be revealed to actually undulate over a longer timeframe, such as a year.  In this example, the short-term undulation could manage fatigue, the medium-term linear progression could increase the work performed, while the long-term undulation could indicate an alternation between hypertrophy-focused and neurally-focused phases.

Remember when we talked about how important technique was?  Technique can also progress over time.  As noted in Part II’s section on GPP, general exercise technique is meant to improve broad athletic qualities.  A specialized, special, or specific exercise technique is meant to more-closely replicate competitive demands, and a phase devoted to it (or the act of training it) is called SPP.  A lifter with a general focus might do lots of non-specific lifts at the start of a training cycle to build muscle and work capacity (say, ab pull-downs, GHRs, and reverse hypers in the Westside system),[iv] then perform more typical Westside work, and then in a circa-maximal phase move exclusively or almost-exclusively to competitive-style lifts (box squat with bands).  You’ll also see Special Strength Training, which includes all forms of SPP done with resistance.[v]

Let’s look at how our simplified Westside example charts out in terms of specificity over time:

In this case, specificity in technique increases over time to get the lifter ready for a meet.  The GPP block could focus on hypertrophy and conditioning; for a geared lifter, the block could include more raw work than usual.  The more typical “balanced block” could incorporate DE work and ME lifts that are better for technique than putting on mass, while the circa-maximal block would crank up the specificity as we saw earlier.  Since it’s hard to quantify technique specificity, calling it a linear progression is more of a theoretical point than anything.

Another interesting point here is that while specificity is increasing, intensity is also increasing.  This is because as the lifter stops rotating exercises at the start of the circa-maximal phase, he becomes more efficient at moving them; this means he’ll be lifting closer to his 1 RM than he would be during the typical training period.  Not all training elements progress in unison like this.  In the above example, volume decreases during this time to help the lifter stay recovered.

I should include the absence of work, whether breaks between sets or layoffs measured in days or longer, as a major factor in training design.  Unlike exercises or loading, rest isn’t generally a featured part of system description, since it’s assumed or part of its drill-down detail.  An exception would be systems that rely heavily on circuits or are focused on improving performance in time-measured competitive events like races; in these systems, the precise manipulation of rest is critical.

Long-View Training Duration

When system changes are standalone, last from a few weeks to a few months, are infrequently-used, or are situational variations on training systems, they are called programs or routines.  Crack open EFS Training Templates and you’ll see a theoretical starting point (The 8 Keys) and several programs that vary on many levels, but retain the feel of Westside.  The same is true with the 5/3/1 system’s assistance work variations: the same basic systematic structure is found in Boring But Big, The Triumvirate, etc.  Programs are generally designed to enhance specific qualities over the course of a few months.

The focus on short-term results and variety means that programs are often aimed at recreational lifters who don’t have yearly plans competitive cycles, though a more serious athlete can use a program to overcome an irregular handicap (such as an injury) or to address a very specific aspect of competition (a sprinter putting an inordinate amount of time into starting, or a PLer doing a deadlift-only program in advance of a deadlift-only meet).  Programs are also far easier to market, which is why Men’s Health covers feature titles like “Eight Weeks to a Bigger Bench” instead of “A Lifetime of Draining, Painful, Often-Frustrating Work is Required to Have a Chance of Reaching Your Bench Press Goals Before Arthritis Sets In…Maybe.”

Periodized Training

Athletes with long-term goals need something more complex than programs (or a string of unrelated programs), which is where periodized training (usually just called “periodization”) comes in.  When a system has built-in changes over periods of time well beyond typical adaptation periods, it’s considered to be periodized.  As we’ve learned to periodize better, this definition has gotten more complicated.  From a strict perspective, periodization is the systematic reconfiguring of an athlete’s training between major competitive events.  Our super-simple Westside example is periodized because after a competition the lifter would use general lifts and techniques, move to a competition-specific circa-maximal phase closer to the next meet, enter a new competition, and then start the process over again.

Periodization is built on changes made during large blocks of training time (on the order of several weeks or months) between major competitive events.[vi] This understanding was cemented by the Eastern Bloc sport researchers back in the 1950’s.  Since then, periodization has come to refer to almost any form of training organization; this is particularly true in the West,[vii] though the change in focus of sports in the former Eastern Bloc countries has muddied the definition as well.  What I called “short-term progressions” earlier are referred to by some as examples of periodization.  For instance, an “undulating periodization” program that changes training variables on session-by-session basis, but has none of the long-range planning put into the traditionally-technical models of periodization, would fall into this much more general definition.  Parallel and block systems are also sometimes considered forms of periodization in the very simple sense, though I think it’s more accurate to say that they are systems that require periodization to be used effectively.  If you intend to dig further into periodization literature, viewing it only as a long-term process will be helpful, particularly if you remember that it especially concerns the period of time between competitive events.

I don’t want to limit training periodization to competitive athletes.  We could stretch the definition out to say that for a recreational athlete, periodization is how your training is structured to achieve long-term goals.  5/3/1 is ultimately about adding weight to the four core lifts (and adding reps to your rep-out sets) until you achieve new one-rep maxes.  Reaching these maxes signals the end of a full training cycle, and the process to achieving them isn’t limited by time—you can reach your PR quickly or over a long haul, depending on how you calculate your percentages.

Similarly, a recreational lifter interested in physique manipulation could have a periodized plan involving alternating bulking and cutting cycles.  The plan could have distinct phases of bulking and cutting (or simply intensified work) that are periodized around goals (such as reaching a certain weight and bodyfat percentage at any point in time), the calendar (the plan ends with a beach vacation), or a mix of both (the plan ends with arriving at a certain weight and bodyfat percentage before taking a beach vacation). Getting back to the idea of programs vs. a periodized training cycle, if you link together various programs with some degree of thought towards a future goal, you can say your approach is periodized.

The History of Training Periodization

Tudor Bompa, a key periodization researcher, notes that periodization is at least as old as the Greek Olympians, who broke their training into three phases: they would train in advance of the competition, compete in the Olympic Games, and then rest before starting again.  The idea was to make sure an athlete was at their peak during the Games.  Every form of periodization follows this basic format in some way.  In fact, up until the twentieth century, periodization was practically identical to the original Greek model, with the first major changes coming from coaches and researchers from Finland who refined the idea somewhat in the 1930’s using designations based on the seasons.[viii]

It took the development of the Soviet sports machine to crank up periodization theory.  Athletic culture had always been a core facet of Soviet national identity, though after WWII, excellence in sport became a national priority as members of both sides of the Cold War began seeing international sports competitions as proxy battlefields for their respective ideologies.  The first step for the Soviets was gearing up their athletic culture, which was heavily influenced by military heritage, into a lockstep factory of athletes that maximized the nation’s large, genetically diverse population.  The entire country was essentially screened for athletic potential, the athletes were classified and grouped based on talent and experience, and then the most promising were “encouraged” into Olympic sports.[ix] As there wasn’t a massive American-style professional sports/entertainment culture to compete with, as well as not much personal freedom to reject a life of sport,[x] the best athletes were destined for the world stage.

At roughly the same time, the Soviets also began attaching scientists to their various athletic clubs and teams, and developing institutes devoted solely to sport science, with many high-level athletes becoming coaches and scientists after retiring from sport.  Such a system was possible only because a totalitarian government demanded it; and because that same government also controlled over a dozen smaller satellite states, it demanded the same of them, which created a small empire of sports factories.

What it also created was the perfect environment for scientific analysis and experimentation on athletes and athletic performance.  For Soviet sports scientists there was an entire nation of coaches and athletes available for research and evaluation.  Traditional practices such as strength training were confirmed and advanced, and innovative practices were likewise confirmed and advanced, or discredited and quickly removed from training systems.  Practitioners of the Westside system will recognize the name of A.S. Prilepin; Prilepin devised the 1RM percentage ranges used by Soviet weightlifters, and did so by analyzing the sets, reps, and weights actually used by lifters.

Another important bit of research was done by Dr. Leonid Matveyev,[xi] who chose to monitor the training plans of participants in the ’52 Olympics[xii] and ended up becoming known by many as the father of periodization; his work cemented the importance of varying volume and intensity as part of periodization.  Other Eastern Bloc coaches and scientists picked up on Matveyev’s focus, including Bompa, Verkhoshansky, Issurin, Bondarchuk, Kaverin, and others.  To adjust to frequent competitions and the heightened abilities of elite athletes, periodization has evolved over the years, though not so much that it can’t be compared to its origins.

Periodization Terminology and Its Role in Defining Training Systems

The Soviets renamed the three Greek phases of training, competing, and resting as “preparatory,” “competitive,” and “transitional” phases, respectively (all terms that Matveyev helped cement) with new sub-units added in.  Because many of the world’s largest sporting competitions work on a year-based system (whether a single year or multiple), periodization involved plans as long as a year or more in length.  Interestingly, the fact that these sports had their largest events in either the summer of the winter meant that there was still a coincidental hint of the seasonal cycle.

Here’s a bottom-up review of traditional periodization terminology, which helps us get more specific with your training calendar:

Microcycle:  This represents the smallest complete and sequentially repeatable group of sessions in a given system.  Most microcycles are a week long and broken down into days to accommodate the calendar week.  They generally have some degree of volume/intensity undulation to help manage fatigue and promote positive adaptations.

In the prototypical Westside example, a microcycle consists of a maximal effort upper body session, a maximal effort lower body session, a dynamic effort upper body session, and a dynamic lower body session performed in some order; after the last of the four sessions is done, the lifter would restart the sequence at his next session.  A bodybuilder’s microcycle might include a chest/back session, a leg session, a trap/shoulder session, and an arm session.  Strength training programs based on total body training might have a microcycle built on three sessions, which each session focused either on maximal effort training, dynamic effort training, or repetition method training.  Complex sports where an athlete must run, jump, lift, perform specialized drills, and even learn plays have more detail, but generally are also built in the same way.

Mesocycle:  In several ways the mesocycle is the long-lost twin of the program.  A mesocycle covers multiple microcycles (often several months worth), and is designed to build up certain sport qualities.  The traditional phases noted above are each an example of a mesocycle.  The mesocycle is so important to the concept of periodization that periodization itself is sometimes described as the arrangement of mesocycles.[xiii] Mesocycles also can correspond to the traditional phases of training, and in some contexts are simply referred to as one of the traditional phases or as part of a traditional phase.[xiv] Note that shifts between mesocycles are sometimes called “transitional phases,” which can be confused with the long-term transitional phase.  The Westside system uses shorter mesocycles that are bound to a lifter’s adaptation rate to rotating maximal effort lifts, with the average length coming out to around three weeks.

Macrocycle:  This is the largest unit of periodization.  It starts with the end of one major competition and runs through the end of the next major competition, and incorporates all of the mesocycles, microcycles, and minor competitions that fall in between.  Again reflecting the worldwide focus, macrocycles are frequently a year in length and named accordingly as annual plans (or quadrennial plans for the Olympics).  The goal is for an athlete to achieve peak performance at the beginning of competition.

Laid out with respect to the calendar and competition, a very general periodized plan might look like this:

In Part IV we’ll add specifics by looking at how the concepts of parallel and block training systems leads to each having its own way of being periodized.  We’ll talk about these two primary examples of training periodization, how they reflect the systems that use them, and what the concept of periodization means to various lifters and athletes.

[i] For a competitive athlete, the next step up would be to arrange given sessions within the training day.

[ii] One counter-example would be that shock methods are so demanding that they often follow traditional strength training, with the reason being that lifting weights serves almost as a warm-up; another exception would be using pre-fatigue exercises to aid in hypertrophy or motor skill development.

[iii] This isn’t to be confused with the “conjugate method” coined by Louis Simmons, which has grown into a catch-all term for the Westside system’s combination of current method training and specialized exercise rotation; Simmons notes that this was inspired by a similar rotation used by the Dynamo Club, a Soviet weightlifting group.

[iv] “Bob Youngs’ Beginner Program” from the EFS Training Manual would be an extreme example of GPP-meets-Westside principles

[v] Verkhoshansky, Y. and Verkhoshansky, N. (2011).  Special Strength Training: Manual for Coaches.  Rome: Verkhoshansky.com.

[vi] Zatsiorsky, V.M. (1995).  Science and Practice of Strength Training.  Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

[vii] Shea, J. (2007).  The Science of Periodization, Pt. 1.  Retrieved from: http://www.apec-s.com/Science%20of%20Periodization%20Part%20I.pdf.

[viii] Wilson, J. and Wilson, G. Periodization Part I – History and Physiological Basis.  Retrieved from: http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/periodization1.pdf.

[ix] Riordan, J. (1977).  Sport in Soviet Society: Development of Sport and Physical Education in Russia and the USSR.  New York: Cambridge UP.

[x] In Soviet Russia, competition beats you.

[xi] Also referenced as “Lev” Matveyev.

[xii] Matveyev, L. (1981.)  Fundamentals of Sports Training. USSR: Progress Publishers.

[xiii] Zatsiorsky

[xiv] Bompa’s works don’t use the term “mesocycle,” and instead refer to it as a “macrocycle,” with several macrocycles making up a phase.