Workout fillers


#1

What are some things i could do in between sets during my workout? I am doing high intensity lifting-low reps high weight and have about a two minute break in between in each set. I’m just wondering if there is any benefit to doing some stretching in between sets. Or if not what are some things to do in between because it seems like a long time just standing around. Thanks.


#2

You don’t really need to do multiple sets, just go to mass muscle failure.


#3

to actually answer your question, yes there are things you can add in. Adding in flexibility/mobility work in between sets is a GREAT idea. Especially if you have a particular area that you need to work on. Tight calves preventing you from getting depth in your squats? Superset 30 seconds calf stretches with your squats.

Hip flexor tightness? Do hip flexor mobilizations as a superset.

These have been called “fillers” or “active recovery” or a variety of terms but they all mean the same thing. Aside from flexibility/mobility work, some people will superset prehab work (rotator cuff strengthening, for example) or core work. As long as the filler does not take away from the main lift you are doing, it should be a safe bet.

I can’t get too specific with you because this is where most of the individualization in a program is built in. Different athletes have different weaknesses and flexibility/mobility issues. Fillers/active recovery are usually designed to help address these specific issues.


#4

Please do not listen to this. Or at least do your research on HIT.

It has been around forever but has been recently popular with McGuff’s “Body by Science” book. Super-slow training is not very effective compared to the alternatives.

I know you’re a huge fan of it, Undiscovered. I just wish you would do some actual research on the topic. It’s been around forever and has consistently turned in terrible results. Please open your eyes.


#5

Please do not listen to this. Or at least do your research on HIT.

It has been around forever but has been recently popular with McGuff’s “Body by Science” book. Super-slow training is not very effective compared to the alternatives.

I know you’re a huge fan of it, Undiscovered. I just wish you would do some actual research on the topic. It’s been around forever and has consistently turned in terrible results. Please open your eyes.[/quote]

It is a hard concept to grasp, I understand that, I won’t try to push it on here as much, but I feel that that workout is really working for myself. I’m a believer of it.


#6

Undiscovered, you are 6’3" 160lbs according to PG scouting report. Can you please explain the results you’ve seen using super-slow training?


#7

At the time I created my PG account back in the beginning of October I was about 158 with a tshirt and shirt on. I started my SS program mid October. Tonight with a tshirt and shirt on I weighed 163. Also my arms feel and are visibily thicker, abs are more defined. None of that really matters to me, all that matters is how I do on the mound.


#8

At the time I created my PG account back in the beginning of October I was about 158 with a tshirt and shirt on. I started my SS program mid October. Tonight with a tshirt and shirt on I weighed 163. Also my arms feel and are visibily thicker, abs are more defined. None of that really matters to me, all that matters is how I do on the mound.[/quote]

Ok, so 5lbs in 3 months. Could you explain the strength gains you made?


#9

Thanks for the replies. I will add in different things, depending on what i think i need to work on.


#10

At the time I created my PG account back in the beginning of October I was about 158 with a tshirt and shirt on. I started my SS program mid October. Tonight with a tshirt and shirt on I weighed 163. Also my arms feel and are visibily thicker, abs are more defined. None of that really matters to me, all that matters is how I do on the mound.[/quote]

Ok, so 5lbs in 3 months. Could you explain the strength gains you made?[/quote]

I will get back with you on Tuesday, which is the day I workout. My trainer has all of my workouts written down.

In the mean time check out this video. I do these same exercises, and this Pro Arena Football player agrees it is a legit workout. Tell me what you think :slight_smile:


#11

Pros:
For absolute strength, I like the premise that the eccentric is overloaded to get more bang for your buck in the exercise. However, I don’t see much difference between the concentric phase and using free weights with accommodating resistance (bands, chains).

Overloading the eccentric while still allowing the concentric to be performed in the same rep has been tried before with some exercises. See:

http://www.inno-sport.net/Absolute-Strength/Video/OLP%20Bench%20Press.AVI

Cons:

  1. this method of training seems to only train absolute strength while completely neglecting training the stretch reflex as in dynamic strength/speed work with free weights. In a real sporting environment the stretch reflex is constantly in play - why neglect training it?

  2. “grinding” reps are extremely taxing on the CNS (think: last rep in a set that takes you 5 seconds to complete where every other rep went up and down smoothly). I have not done this type of training but I imagine the risk of burnout would be very high when every single rep is balls to the walls as much effort as you can possibly apply to the machine throughout the entire ROM.

  3. this training uses EXPENSIVE machines

  4. this training uses expensive MACHINES. It’s widely agreed upon in the strength training community that free weights have more functional carryover to sports than single-plane machine exercises. That doesn’t necessarily mean the theory behind it is wrong though. Get the most out of an absolute strength movement by overloading every single part of the movement, INCLUDING the eccentric. I think that has some merit. But I don’t think this concept alone can be the basis for a comprehensive strength program.


#12

As far as workout fillers go.

Work on hip, ankle, thoraic (did I spell that right?), and shoulder mobility between some of the sets of your heavier exercises. I usually do some mobility work (in addition to what I do when I warm up) when I lift heavy - deadlifts, squats, and bench. And also towards the end of my workout - I’ll do some (one or two sets of about 8 reps) mobilization work followed by a static stretch (2 sets holding for about 20 seconds).


#13

I know this is totally different from my original question, but i was wondering about isolation work. As of late i have been only doing major exercises for my upper body. DB press, rows, and different variations of them two. I have started up throwing again and the back of my shoulder has been pretty sore along with the tricep, but only on my right arm. I think part of it is that i have gained a good 6-8 mph since October and my arm isn’t used to decelerating it. I don’t know if that makes any sense or not, but should i be doing some shoulder/tricep work along with my main lifts?


#14

Yes. You should add chin-ups and pull-ups to your regimen at the very least, though DB rows are excellent and you should certainly keep those!


#15

I do chin-ups and pull-ups, i forgot to put those on there. I will add some tricep/shoulder exercises to it. Thanks.


#16

If you are doing pullup and pushups your triceps and biceps should be fine. Bands, medicine balls and weighted balls(falt ground) along with dealifts should be great. Look over Eric Cressy’s site for more ideas.


#17

I do deadlifts on my lower body day, and i admit i have been falling behind on my med ball work. I need to take the time to start doing them again. As for push-ups, Cressey had a quite a few different variations on a recent post that i will begin to use to substitue so i am not always DB pressing and incline DB pressing. This should get enough tri/bi work in without the isolation work on them. Thanks.


#18

Such an interesting question you have proposed. Just got off the phone with my trainer so I guess I have the answer you want. We change our workout up quite a bit so the weights always are changing due to pre-exhaust, fatigue, etc. Which I’m sure you fully understand. Also I only got the results from the main 3 compound exercises I do the majority of the workouts.

Mid october

Leg Press- 220…now at 280…27% increase

Pulldown- 125…now at 155…24% increase

Dip- 90…now at 110…22% increase

I know many are fixated on the weight, but we are only concerned with the true load.

[quote=“LankyLefty”]Pros:
For absolute strength, I like the premise that the eccentric is overloaded to get more bang for your buck in the exercise. However, I don’t see much difference between the concentric phase and using free weights with accommodating resistance (bands, chains).

The concentric phase is pretty much the same but the thing is, the eccentric is the most important part of the exercise.
Overloading the eccentric while still allowing the concentric to be performed in the same rep has been tried before with some exercises. See

http://www.inno-sport.net/Absolute-Strength/Video/OLP%20Bench%20Press.AVI
The guy in the video literally threw that bar, which I hope he understands is putting 3 to 4 times the amount of stress on his joints by doing this.

Cons:

  1. this method of training seems to only train absolute strength while completely neglecting training the stretch reflex as in dynamic strength/speed work with free weights. In a real sporting environment the stretch reflex is constantly in play - why neglect training it?

I[b] honestly have no clue what you mean by “the strech reflex”. I’m pretty sure this is working for me just from this evaulation: http://www.perfectgame.org/Players/Playerprofile.aspx?ID=286715

It’s pretty apparent that this style of strength training doesn’t have any negative effects ( you think that it could for some reason???lol) in a real sporting event.[/b]

  1. “grinding” reps are extremely taxing on the CNS (think: last rep in a set that takes you 5 seconds to complete where every other rep went up and down smoothly). I have not done this type of training but I imagine the risk of burnout would be very high when every single rep is balls to the walls as much effort as you can possibly apply to the machine throughout the entire ROM.

Well it is pretty damn hard, I agree. That’s why I workout 1 time a week, the rest of the week I let my body do the work( I recover a 100% before I workout next)

  1. this training uses EXPENSIVE machines
  2. this training uses expensive MACHINES. It’s widely agreed upon in the strength training community that free weights have more functional carryover to sports than single-plane machine exercises. That doesn’t necessarily mean the theory behind it is wrong though. Get the most out of an absolute strength movement by overloading every single part of the movement, INCLUDING the eccentric. I think that has some merit. But I don’t think this concept alone can be the basis for a comprehensive strength program.[/quote]

I agree they are expensive but you should be able to find gyms/facillities that have the similiar equipment. I understand that you have to use what you got and although you might not have the exact machines, I think a lot of SS protocols can be used with anything.

There is even another con, very few people understand this style of training.

[color=red]


#19

Not sure I understand the difference between the weight and true load. Can you explain a little further?


#20

More research on SuperSlow training…

http://baye.com/a-review-of-research-on-superslow®-high-intensity-strength-training/

[quote]There is no conclusive research showing SuperSlow or other slow repetition protocols are more effective for increasing muscular strength and size than traditional repetition speeds. Force gauge studies suggest there is no significant difference in peak forces or quality of muscular loading between traditional repetition speeds and slower repetitions.
[/quote]

Also of note:

[quote]Advocates claim SuperSlow strength training is safer than traditional, faster repetition protocols because it exposes the body to lower levels of force. However, force gauge experiments by Brian Johnston have shown no significant difference in peak forces during seated cable shoulder presses using 10/10, 5/5, or 2/4 repetition speeds.
[/quote]

And on, and on, and on.

Improving the contractile strength of a localized muscle group using isolation-based machines may very well be a better approach to building strength in that muscle group. As I told TheUndiscovered: Even if that is true (and no study supports it, for the record), why would working out with full body compound movements using free weights be a better idea than using movement-restricted Nautilus machines if the Nautilus super-slow training made better strength gains?

The reason is not terribly obvious, but if you think about it with an open mind, you can figure out the answer: Baseball (and most other sports) are not played in an isolation-based setting! I do not use my biceps/triceps/quads/hamstrings in a maximal strength contractile function. I integrate all components of my body to improve rotational speeds by properly sequencing them to produce the best result possible. This is exactly what “body by science” methods do not teach.

Superslow training is better than nothing, but so is everything. The three laws of exercise science are:

  1. Everything works.
  2. Some things work better than others.
  3. Nothing works forever.