weights #2394
The Weights Mailing List
ONE VS MANY SETS: response to Mel
by Joseph Brown <br...@Psych.Stanford.EDU>
Re: Palm Software
by Will Lau <contac...@bigfoot.com>
Re: Palm Software
by Jamie Allonby <Jamie....@EuropaEngineering.com>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: ONE VS MANY SETS: response to Mel
From: Joseph Brown <br...@Psych.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 06:56:19 -0700
Response to Mel Siff's substantive critique:
I thank Mel for doing a thorough and substantive examination of
Carpinelli's paper. I find that I am in agreement with Mel on many
points, but not on all, and I want to summarize his arguments and
respond to them:
Mel grants that one set schemes are basically as effective as others for
building strength and mass for the first few years of training for
average athletes. But he notes that one set approaches have not been
studied in elite strength athletes, that is, competitive lifters, and you
can't generalize even from experienced gym strength trainers to that elite
group. He also notes that current lifting approaches by this group appear
to use even lower reps (but more sets) than those in many one set
approaches.
First, I want to highlight something Mel did assert, that for years of
initial training for the average person, a one set scheme does just as
well as others for building size and strength (no better, but just as
well). That is a really important point, I believe, and one that hasn't
received enough attention. For many many of us, a one set approach is
just great! In other words, for years, one can be building strength and
size on a lower volume workout than is typically recommended...and a
number of studies in the review tested exactly that, 1x10 schemes
vs. 3x10, and found no difference in strength/size gained.
But Mel makes another point that I agree with him on and fault
Carpinelli on...you can't generalize
from these findings to another, special, population. Here Mel argues the
studies are just about useless for understanding what is needed by a
competitive, advanced, lifter. And he's right. It could be that such
athletes need MORE training, or LESS. It is doubtful that anyone is going
to be able to do a nice controlled study with such a selective group, for
a lot of reasons. Thus each explores and finds some training approach
that works for him/her. The research doesn't provide a guide for this
population.
But how many of us are competitive lifters? How many of us lift for
fitness, and to support climbing, running, cycling, martial arts, etc.?
I think the current lifting
paradigm recommends the multi-set approach when for many of us, a one
set scheme would work JUST AS WELL. For example, I lift because I want to
have a strong body overall for martial arts training. If I can get just
as strong with a one set scheme, and that will do me just fine for
years, why would I choose another scheme that is more time-consuming AND
is more appropriate for athletes whose sport event IS lifting? For that
athlete, I think multiple sets are necessary because they are improving
their skills at maximal one rep lifts *as well as* building
strength. Thus sets with many reps, and single sets, just don't seem to
fit the specificity principle.
I am very grateful to Mel for taking the time and effort to critically
examine Carpinelli's review. I better understand where he is coming
from. I think we are talking about two different populations. I'm
talking about those who strength train for other sports besides
competitive lifting. For that special group, I think Mel's critique of
one set approaches makes sense.
I'd like to hear what people (particularly Mel) think about this argument.
Joseph
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Palm Software
From: "Will Lau" <contac...@bigfoot.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 06:56:52 -0700
There are a number of Palm apps out there that record training, just look
at http://www.palmgear.com/ and do a search. My preference is to set up my
own training database using HanDBase. Nothing beats setting up your own
formatted training diary. One set up it's really easy to record new entry,
simple as a couple of taps.
-Will
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Palm Software
From: Jamie Allonby <Jamie....@EuropaEngineering.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 06:57:03 -0700
Is threre anyway you could use a spreadsheet.
Jamie
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of weights
Issues of the weights digest, along with a Links directory, a bookstore,
and much more, are available at WeightsNet:
To contribute to the next issue, please send email to:
mailto:wei...@WeightsNet.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe, send mail to:
mailto:weights...@WeightsNet.com
For further information, contact Michael Sullivan at:
mailto:sull...@WeightsNet.com
The views expressed in weights are those of the individual authors only.