Concurrent Strategies in Strength Training, Part 2

This is part two of a three-part series.

Waves are very similar to pyramids.

Here’s an example of the wide wave loading protocol:

Stages or plateau loading are a combination of pyramids and straight sets. Here are a couple of examples:

For more examples regarding loading protocols, I highly recommend reading Christian Thibaudeau’s, Black Book of Training Secrets–Enhanced Edition. Most of these graphs are taken from there. Another interesting book to consider is Joe Kenn’s, Coach’s Strength Training Playbook, which is another awesome read.

My opinion regarding waves, pyramids, and stages is that they are very useful when the load stays within 10 percent of 1RM. In other words, narrow variants are ok. But I think wide variants (those explained) are mostly crap (although a gross amount of liters still use it so I guess they haven’t read Zatsiorsky’s book from 95 or Poliquin’s stuff). It is ok if you utilize reps and loads from two near repetition zones (ME/SE, SE/RE), but if you try to utilize whole repetition continuums, I guess you are confusing your body (whatever that would be). Also, you don’t have appropriate volume within each zone to drain potential adaptational effects compared to narrow variants. I again highly suggest looking at Black Book for great ideas on how to organize narrow variants for different levels of athletes. To conclude, rep schemes (utilizing whole repetition continuums) on a given exercise as a form of concurrent training is a bad choice. Avoid it.

Daily undulating periodization (DUP)

The idea of daily undulating periodization (or what is also called non-linear periodization in some circles) is to basically devote a whole training session toward a given goal (maximal strength, muscular hypertrophy, muscular endurance). Suppose you have two different training sessions—training A and training B.

Now, you identify different training goals that you want to concurrently (parallel) achieve at the same time. Suppose they are maximal strength, muscular hypertrophy, and muscular endurance. To achieve them, you plan to use ME, SE, and RE methods and loading protocols. Now, you can mix and match and get this kind of training organization:

You have six combinations of training sessions combining training A and B and the three different loading protocols ME, SE, and RE. If you do three training sessions per week, you have two weeks to pass the full circle.

This kind of planning allows for week long loading waves (or undulations) that may provide variety and some kind of integrated unloading. There are a couple of studies (which I’m too lazy to find) that show better goal achievement with DUP than with linear (or traditional) periodization. I don’t want to open a huge can of worms discussing the study design and subjects, but I guess this kind of concurrent training organization has its place under the sun for a given individual aiming to achieve specific goals under a specific situation.

Coach Alwyn Cosgrove believes in DUP. I trust Alwyn Cosgrove. So, I guess I find DUP a good tool in your toolbox. Use it when you find it appropriate. To be honest, I haven’t used it yet, not on me, nor on the people I coach. However, that doesn’t necessarily mean that I will not use it one day. Now, let’s discuss priority lift strategies.

Priority lifts

I openly admit it. This is my favorite approach to concurrent strength training. I don’t know if anyone called it priority lifts before me or if anyone knows what the hell I’m talking about here, but I’ve called it that somehow. Because we are going to differ between different exercise categories and give them priorities, I hope that calling this method priority lifts was a smart idea. If you think it is not, feel free to contact me and curse me.

According to its importance, each exercise can be classified into a separate group. Depending on the author, there could be different classifications of the exercises. For example, Joe Kenn, in his book, The Coach’s Strength Training Playbook, uses the following classification of exercises:

• Foundation exercises
• Supplemental exercises
• Major assistance exercises
• Secondary assistance exercises

One classification of exercises that I will use here is the classification that Christian Thibaudeau presented in his series of articles entitled, “How to Design a Damn Good Program” published at T-Nation.com. If you haven’t read this series of articles (and actually everything this guy has ever wrote), you are missing a lot because there is more practical information in those couple of pages than in 500 plus pages in a strength training textbook. It is an awesome article and one of my favorites.

Basically, Joe Kenn and Chris Thibaudeau use the same classification with some minor differences between groups. Most coaches usually reduce exercise classification to core and assistance exercises, which is more practical and easier to use. Again, everything depends on the goal of training and the context and so does the exercise classification that you use. If exercises are tools, their classifications can be different types and organizations of the toolbox. Be flexible with classifications. They are not set in stone.

According to your sport and goal, different exercises may be considered under a given group. For example, Olympic lifters may use the following classifications:

This could be an example of exercise classification for a powerlifter:

For an average athlete looking for strength training, the following classification could be used:

Please note that different classifications may be used depending on the weak and strong points of the athlete, his level of development, training period, emphasis and other stuff. Those classifications are used to help the coach organize the training system and prioritize things according to the demands of the sport and position. With average athletes, the primary exercise would be those that give the most bang for the buck and have the greatest transfer to the field while other exercises will aim to assist that transfer and provide whole body development and injury prevention.

Because exercise categories can (or should?) have their own planning (different loading, progression, and periodization plans for different exercise categories and their usage/rotation in the training system), concurrent training can be easily achieved. For example, a powerlifter would build explosive strength with DE box squats, chains and bands, bench presses, and speed deadlifts. He would build maximal strength with ME squats, presses, and deadlifts and their special variations (secondary exercises), and he would build muscular hypertrophy with SE and RE single-leg exercises and dumbbell variations of presses, some chins, and rows.

With an average athlete, explosive strength would be developed with Olympic lift variations, plyometrics, and explosive jumps, and maximal strength would be developed with ME/SE squats, benches, and deadlifts. Muscular hypetrophy would be developed with SE/RE single leg stuff, dumbbell variations, isolation stuff, chins, and rows.

In other words, primary exercises may use the ME loading protocol. Secondary exercises may use the SE loading protocol, and auxiliary and remedial exercises may use the RE loading protocol to achieve concurrent training approach.

However, if someone wants to nitpick (and that would be me), this can be considered concurrent training as a whole (because all loading protocols are present). It may not be considered concurrent training depending on which movement pattern or muscle groups we are talking about. For example, in the athlete’s situation mentioned earlier, the legs would receive explosive strength work, maximal strength work, and muscular hypertrophy work. The situation is similar for the upper body “push” muscles, but the upper body “pull” muscles (used for chins and rows) will receive only muscular hypertrophy work. Ring a bell or not?

To be considered totally concurrent, all movement patterns must receive the same treatment (ME, SE, and RE work; not necessary for DE) in a training program or it would be only partially concurrent. For this reason, most, if not all, concurrent powerlifting, Olympic lifting, and athletic training programs are partially concurrent because only the legs and push muscle groups receive concurrent treatment (with the exception of upper body pull muscles). Is this a bad thing? Certainly not! I’m just pointing it out, and because most sports revolve around legs and push muscles, this is a fine situation for me.

However, in bodybuilding, this would under develop certain muscle groups. That’s for sure. And because goals in athletic training, Olympic lifting, and powerlifting are not bodybuilding in nature and because I don’t talk about bodybuilding here (although some ideas can be certainly used with minor modifications), there shouldn’t be much concern about it anyway. Certainly, it would be very usable to classify exercises for every movement pattern (or muscle group) in addition to the sport classification already explained.

This way we could differ between:

• Sport-based or athletic-oriented classification of exercises (according to the greatest transfer to the field or event or the most used muscle groups/movement patterns in sport)
• Movement pattern or muscle group (bodybuilding) based classification of exercises

Because I’ve already given hypothetical examples of the exercise classifications for Olympic lifting, powerlifting, and average athletic training, here is a modified exercise classification based on movement patterns taken from the already mentioned awesome article by Christian Thibaudeau, “How to Design a Damn Good Program.”

Using this movement pattern-based exercise classification, different goals can be achieved via different distributions of loading protocols. I will give an example using Chris Thibaudeau’s classification of loading protocols.

The training sessions for intermediate lifters can be easily designed using the presented information. The attribute, “intermediate” is based on the work of Mark Rippetoe and Lon Kilgore, authors of Starting Strength and Practical Programming. Both books are a must in your training library. For more information, please read my review, “What I Have Learned from Practical Programming” published at EliteFTS.com.

I will give two examples aimed at increasing explosive strength (via Olympic lifts and explosive jumping), maximal strength, and muscular hypertrophy. One is based on the whole body split and the other is based on a lower/upper split. Here is the example of the whole body split:

Here is the lower/upper split:

Once we arranged the training sessions, we can plan progressions for loading protocols.

Stay tuned for part three!!

Elite Fitness Systems strives to be a recognized leader in the strength training industry by providing the highest quality strength training products and services while providing the highest level of customer service in the industry. For the best training equipment, information, and accessories, visit us at www.EliteFTS.com.