Periodization and Psychomotoer learning

[baggettpv]

Ok guys/gals,
Can you just summarize your periodization plans and maybe give a sample/explanation of each cycle as you see it? Maybe we can come to a simple concensus on what is the norm in America for people posting on this site.


Rick Baggett
WSTC LLC

[Sebes]

I got this off of Wikipedia:

Periodization is an organized approach to training that involves progressive cycling of various aspects of a training program during a specific period of time. The roots of periodization come from Hans Selye’s model, known as the General adaptation syndrome, describing biological responses to stress. Selye's work has been used by the athletic community since the late 1950s (Fleck, 1999).
The GAS describes three basic stages of response to stress: (a) the Alarm stage, involving the initial shock of the stimulus on the system, (b) the Resistance stage, involving the adaptation to the stimulus by the system, and (c) the Exhaustion stage, in which repairs are inadequate, and a decrease in system function results. The foundation of periodic training is keeping ones body in the resistance stage without ever going into the exhaustion stage. By adhering to cyclic training the body is given adequate time to recover from significant stress before additional training is undertaken.
Selye (1957) labeled beneficial stresses as "eustress" and detrimental stresses as "distress". In athletics, when physical stress is at a healthy level (eustress), an athlete experiences muscular strength and growth, while excessive physical stress (distress) can lead to tissue damage, disease, and death. Periodization is most widely used in resistance program design to avoid over-training and to systematically alternate high loads of training with decreased loading phases to improve components of muscular fitness (e.g. strength, strength-speed, and strength-endurance).
Russian physiologist Leo Metveyev and Czech sport scientist Tudor Bompa expanded and further organized the periodization model. Bompa and Metveyev have been regarded as the fathers of modern periodization. Since the 1960s, other coaches and exercise physiologists have added to the original models, creating “modifiedâ€Â

[Tim McMichael]

The difficulty with periodization is that it was developed in the Eastern European sports labs. The less that is said about this the better, but it remains a fact that the length and duration of many of the macrocycles were designed to coincide with the on/off rhythm of doping. When this training theory first became available in the West, after the wall came down, these unethical elements of the program were suppressed. For this reason many athletes, myself included, broke down when following the volumes and intensities recommended in the original documents. This happened even though I had more than a decade of uninterrupted training age behind me.

Another problem is the fact that, for younger athletes, the American sports system revolves around higher education with all its academic and social challenges, and for elite athletes, it often revolves around having a family and holding down a day job. The Eastern European model did not have the education and socialization of its athletes to consider, and their lives were largely controlled and subsidized by the state. Therefore, a strictly regimented training schedule was much easier to implement.

Many of the elements of periodization are of great value. Its description of the biology of stress and recovery cycles is a valid observation of the way athletes improve, and any training program must take this into account. Its emphasis on progression through appropriate training aims leading up to maximum competitive fitness is also valid. There are, however, appropriate modifications that I feel must be made to accommodate the moral and social differences between the American school system and authoritarian programs such as the East German and Romanian laboratories.

I favor a much more flexible program that follows the general principles of periodization, but leaves a great deal of room to maneuver around the much more variable levels of fitness and preparation that are the result of an independent lifestyle. Having had to train through the rigors of holding down two jobs I can tell you that, when you are exhausted to the point that it seems like a rational idea to take naps at stop lights, periodization as Bompa envisioned it no longer applies. I still made it to the Indoor World Championships that year, and I promise, if I had tried to peroidize my training I would have been injured or sick within weeks.

I think it is important to remember that when the Soviets were producing their scientifically trained and enhanced athletes, we had people whose training programs involved jumping the fence at the local high school track who were holding their own with them.

I know that a lot has changed since I took a good hard look at periodization, and I desparately need to update my knowledge base. If anyone has any suggestions as to where I might start I would greatly appreciate it. I am currently training a world class heptathlete and am in way over my head.

[SinCity]

I use a 4 week cycle. But, each cycle builds upon the next one with that 4th week being a reduced week for recovery. But, also the cycles and recovery phases depend on the time of year and the goals for each cycle. I try to specialize as much as I can for each athlete, depending on their weaknesses and their age level. I believe that younger, even if they are better, need less work than older athletes who might not be as good.

But, the overlying variable in all the cycles or phases is how much I stress nutrition, recovery and sleep. I believe those 3 things are the most important, no matter how you set up your strength and conditioning cycles.
Nutrition- will differ for each athlete, so explaining this is difficult

Recovery- 2-3 recovery days a week. This is anything from just a simple foam roll workout and/or stretching to a less intense lifting/running day.

Sleep- Might be the most important. I stress 9 hrs a day.

One book I have read that is the basis of what I design is "Core Performance" by Mark Verstagen. His workouts are unbelievable and they produce ATHLETES not just strong individuals. I have incorporated his basic principles and workouts into what I design for my athletes and it has been really beneficial.

I would like to say one last thing. I don't think there is any one way that is better than the other, but do the athletes believe in what they are doing, where they are going, and do they trust their coach. And, do they take care of their bodies with proper nutrition, recovery and sleep.