Today, there is a significant difference in the understanding of training compared to the past.
Trends are different and information is available to everyone. There are thousands of types of training, each of which has its own philosophy and benefits, and whose sole purpose is to attract clients in order to earn money.
If we take a closer look at life, the whole world is one consumer society and that is its point today.
There are many universal training methods that promote molds and templates with supersets, metabolic cycles, and various dynamic loads.
The truth is that there is no such thing.
There are studies that are conducted today more than ever, but this only shows that there are some regularities that you can use in training.
The basics of training are essentially simple.
A greater number of repetitions with lower intensity reduces mass and burns fat, which means definition. A smaller number of repetitions with a higher intensity consumes sugar, which means more mass.
Today's trend is primarily based on the fact that people today move less. People spend more time in a static position and there is a great need for them to have at least basic functionality in movement because they don't have time for it anymore.
You see for example... "static" in humans leads to weakening or even atrophy of the foot muscles which leads to the inevitable disruption of the body's basic stability and basic coordination. Many people think that they suffer from vertigo because of this. The basic training is then the activity of the basic muscles for stability.
The settings of such training are to exercise to if you only to improve movement, stability, and coordination. Mainly diagonal muscle chains are engaged, which are naturally engaged during human movement and activities.
However, is it the most expedient method?
Is the goal a good one if you only improve the basic functioning that is, improve the functionality of a person?
Can such training go further than that?
Of course, he will be able to, but very little further. Increasing the intensity and various combinatorics can only move the scope of such a concept a little further.
For a normal static person nowadays, this kind of training is more than enough, but there is also an army of young people who would like to continue.
The point is that exercises primarily of diagonal, kinetic muscle chains do not contribute much if you want more than an improvement in functionality.
You get the beauty of muscular expression, tone, and strength in another way.
You have to hit the muscle in a completely different way. This is known today as "old-school" training.
This is the only way to go beyond the basic functionality, which, it is true, can go to professional distances with such training, but you can only get the beauty and strength of the body with the "old school" of training.
It is true that many coaches will not like this conclusion of mine, but it is the whole truth.
Professional athletes, too, cannot progress if they do not progress in the basic strength of, above all, the important muscles for the sport they play.
If they use up all the benefits that functional training provides, the only way to progress is to again directly, in isolation, hit a muscle that is important for the sport the athlete plays.
You get a higher level of excitability of motor neurons and then you increase the intensity of functional exercises, which leads to further progress.
This actually makes the difference between champions and others.
The real question is whether to start a phased training plan or use all phases of training in one training session. What does it depend on? What is the best effect? What is repetitive power and how to use it in the right way? What's the secret to persisting and not just achieving? About this in the following titles...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrsG3sT5B1w
Comments