Several months back, I concluded a 6-part series for FCF on periodization of strength and outlined a 4-phase sample routine. The routine was an example of a linear (sometimes called Western) periodization model, where the phases are progressively structured, one building upon the next. This method was the original version of periodization and although still widely practiced and useful, there are several newer and in certain instances more effective periodization schemes.
A number of years ago, while trying to sell my services to a well-known fighter, I explained to him how his training could be more effective if he were to periodize his training regimen. A lot of the chronic fatigue and injuries that had been plaguing him could be alleviated, not to mention the newfound strength and explosive power to be gained.
I describe a periodized training plan, in which the training period, from one competition to the next, (or macrocycle) is broken into manageable phases: preparatory, competitive, and transition, with the understanding that peak performance cannot be maintained throughout each stage. Recovery sections are built into the program and the timing of peaking is carefully planned. By having different phases with different goals and training protocol, specific attributes, such as power and endurance, that if trained for simultaneously would be mutually exclusive, can be achieved over a training period, while minimizing overtraining and the potential for injury. I went on to sketch out a typical 12-week mesocycle:
Phase-1: Anatomical Adaptation (training to train)
Phase-2: Hypertrophy (bodybuilding methods)
Phase-3: Maximal Strength (improve neuromuscular efficiency)
Phase-4: Conversion Phase (convert non-specific gains into power/endurance, etc.)
Phase-5: Transition (recovery/active rest)
I went on to explain how a year’s training could be divided into 4 cycles of roughly 3 months each, peaking for a major competition roughly every three months.
After concluding my little presentation, anticipating the congratulations (and big fat check) that were sure to follow, I was a little taken aback when he countered that such a method was impractical for him since he would often take a fight on a moments notice, he needed to stay in “peak” condition at all times.
Not one to give up, I contended that by definition, peak condition was impossible to retain for more than a couple of weeks at the longest, and then outlined the concept of non-linear periodization, that in his case, since his competitions were irregularly timed, would probably be more viable.
In the classical model, the buildup to higher intensities occurs over time, whereas in the non-linear method, the volume and intensity varies greatly within the week. For example one might train with moderate (8-10 RM) resistances on day-1 (hypertrophy), heavy (3-5 RM) resistances on day-2 (maximal strength) and light (12-15 RM) resistances on day-3 (power endurance). As with the linear model, after a 12-week period there would be a period of active rest. According to studies, this method is as effective (at least short-term) as linear periodization and more effective than non-periodized training.
Another popular alternative to the linear method is alternating periodization, in which volume and intensity undulates from mesocycle to mesocycle. Though one of the benefits of linear periodization is that you can work towards your optimal loading in a progressive manner. A downside is that at the beginning of a cycle you may be de-training the desired adaptations of the cycle’s completion, and near the completion you may lose some of the adaptations gained at the onset of the cycle.
In a linear plan, intensity builds progressively: 1, 2, 3, 4. In alternating periodization, the volume and intensity tends to rise and fall: 1, 3, 2, 4. A benefit of the alternating method is that you get more frequent exposure to varying stimulus, and thus are less likely to become detrained in any particular biomotor ability. The downside is that you need to be experienced in load selection, or you may not work near optimal loading.
Westside Barbell, the most successful powerlifting gym, and often on the cutting edge of training, have devised their own version of periodization, which they have termed, conjugate periodization. In their method, training is centered on three different pathways:
1. Max Effort
2. Repetition
3. Dynamic Effort
Though similar in appearance to the non-linear method, Westside has a different rational for their approach. Rather than being suited to those who compete irregularly, they employ conjugated periodization to overcome adaptation and plateaus. When training for maximal strength, the central nervous system inhibition is reduced. Thus the maximum number of motor units are activated with optimal discharge frequency. The drawback of using this method is that training with weights above 90 percent RM for much longer than three weeks causes the nervous system to fatigue and then strength diminishes.
Westside Barbell was able to find a way around this three-week barrier by switching the exercises used for the max effort method every one to three weeks. This keeps the body fresh so the method can be used year round. In the linear model, one might attempt a single rep max (1 RM) only once every 8-12 weeks, but in the conjugate method, a 1 RM may be attempted almost weekly. Westside utilizes this method solely for improving 1RM in powerlifting competition-bench press, squat and deadlift, but these principals can be adapted to suit the biomechanical needs of the MMA fighter.
However, in addition, to maximal strength and explosive power, the MMA athlete needs to develop static strength, eccentric strength and various kinds of strength endurance (at various joint angles), not to mention agility, balance, and technical/tactical skills. Another difficulty is that in the Westside method, a typical program is a 4-day-per-week split, but in most cases (because of other needs, and limited recovery ability) the MMA fighter can’t afford to devote 4 days per week to strength training. The MMA athlete has a greater number of biomotor functions for which to train than the powerlifter, but fewer days to devote to lifting weights.
The solution is to use “conjugated” microcycles (of days/weeks) within a linear, or alternating meso/macrocycle (months/year) framework. This sounds complicated, and is something that I will cover in future articles. However I will say that “Max Effort”, or maximal strength is basis for power, and even endurance, so it should be given priority, while the other biomotor abilities can be rotated within the mesocycles.
Which method should you use? Each has its advantages and disadvantages. In many ways linear periodization is best suited to novices and under certain conditions, the benefits of the other methods don’t outweigh the extra complexity and detailed planning required. Experiment with the different methods and if it works for you, use it.
So what happened with the fighter mentioned above? He felt that it was too late in his career to be trying untested ideas and methods and declined my services. I made one last ditch effort explaining that for him it was particularly important to change his approach. In our youth we can often get away with inferior methods and overtraining, but for the mature athlete to have continued success, training smart (rather than just hard) becomes increasingly important. I failed to make my case and he continued on a losing streak he had been having and not long after retired.
I did, shortly thereafter, start working with a former training partner of his, who in a few short months, made gains in strength and power that far exceeded his expectations.
References:
Fleck S. & Kraemer W., Designing Resistance Training Programs Second Edition, Champagne IL, Human Kinetics, 1997
Zatsiorsky, Vladimir M., Science and Practice of Strength Training, Champagne IL, Human Kinetics, 1995
King I, How to Write Strength Training Programs: A Practical Guide, Toowong, Qld, KSI, 1999
Tate D, Periodization Bible-Part-II, Testosterone Magazine, Issue 133, Dec. 2000
About the author: Mark Ginther has over 20 years experience in sports, martial arts, and strength training. He has worked with numerous athletes including Michael Hawkins (formerly of the Boston Celtics), as well as several pro and amateur boxers. In 1999 he became the Strength & Conditioning Coach for AMC Kickboxing & Pankration.
He's recently returned from 6 years in Tokyo, where he was highly respected in both the fitness and martial arts industries. He trained K-1 Champion Nicholas Pettas for his comeback, and has written for, or been featured in several of the industry’s top publications. His monthly strength & conditioning column has appeared in Full Contact Fighter for 4 years, and ran for 2 years in IRONMAN Japan. He was featured in a cover story in Tokyo city magazine, Metropolis, and interviewed for the Japanese bodybuilding magazine, BODYPOWER. His fitness column ran in Tokyo’s Player for 6 months.
