The thoughts behind Sheiko programming

[Deleted]

hi,
i am wondering if anyone can give me [and others] on the thoughts / science behind the maths / programming of sheiko style training. i know it helps condition lifters for meets, but what i want to know / understand is the actual thought process behind doing so much volume, and exercises twice in a workout, sometimes twice a day on same exercises, very limited assistance work, etc. i think if me [and others] can underastand this side of things better instead of ust doingnumber 29 or number 37, etc, we may be a little more able to program our own lifting to suit our own particular needs much better.
mark

[benburgess]

www.elitefts.com/sheiko/BI_Sheiko_Online_Translation.pdf

www.elitefts.com/sheiko/Sheiko_book.htm

[davebates]

Dec 10, 2009 1:52:42 GMT -5 @markroskell said:

hi,
i am wondering if anyone can give me [and others] on the thoughts / science behind the maths / programming of sheiko style training.
I will try to help you understand what i know

i know it helps condition lifters for meets, correct

but what i want to know / understand is the actual thought process behind doing so much volume,
The idea is the practice the competition exercises to perfection. Every lifter has A certain amount of volume that works for them to build strength. One key is to find it.

and exercises twice in a workout?
The second round of the same exercise is to get extra work in on that exercise.
in addition, It helps you mentally perform the exercise to perfection even when you are tired.,

sometimes twice a day on same exercises,Yup and it sucks

very limited assistance work, etc?
Yup, If I'm itching to do other stuff, I do it on "off training days"

Keep in mind here, all that matters in a competition is the squat, bench and deadlift. Nothing else matters!
Once you understand the method they use in training (drilling the competition exercises), then you can come up with a program that works for you. None of their methods are published per say. You would need to get classroom books from the physical cultural institute to fully understand, it is a 6 year course. 3 years classroom and 3 years practical to be a coach. (i have a friend that went there)

i think if me [and others] can understand this side of things better instead of us doing number 29 or number 37, etc,
If you read sheiko's book it will give you some insight to his way of thinking but it will not have all of the answers. If your a numbers crunching kind of guy, you will quickly see the difference between #29 and #37. They may look the same on paper, but once you get started the affects are very different.

we may be a little more able to program our own lifting to suit our own particular needs much better.
This is true, this is why this forum is here so we can learn how others react to different programs that we know of and some I have written. The programs I have written are the result of lifter feedback and my own experience. All I care about is figuring out what works to get you guys stronger!

I hope this has answered some of your questions. -Dave

mark

[Deleted]

hi,

thanks for your replies.

i would assume that this question has been asked lots of times here before, buti woudl like to know when it says to do 70% or 80% in the shirt or suit [shirt especially] it is usually impossibel to touch or get depth in todays gear. do you recommend trying to go as close to chest as possible in shirt and as deep as possible in squat? or straps down in squat suit until 90%+?

thanks,

mark

[davebates]

Dec 12, 2009 17:21:52 GMT -5 @markroskell said:

hi,

thanks for your replies.
your welcome!

i would assume that this question has been asked lots of times here before, but i woudl like to know when it says to do 70% or 80% in the shirt or suit [shirt especially] it is usually impossibel to touch or get depth in todays gear. do you recommend trying to go as close to chest as possible in shirt and as deep as possible in squat? or straps down in squat suit until 90%+?
It really depends on the lifter and their budget. Most guys train in "old or loose equipment" If all you have is new equipment, I would go as far as the equipment will let you. Straps down work well for most guys until they hit 90%. But remember, everybody is different. Hopefully some other guys like ben and joel will chime in as well.

thanks,

mark

[Deleted]

Ben and others, my question is in regard to how you would classify Sheiko's programs. Would you call this block periodization utilizing waved intensity? It doesn't seem to be linear or sequenced as much as waved. Does anyone know if this was Boris' own take on the basic ideas behind block periodization and if it would be considered "waved" and more importantly what do you see as the benefit over say a standard linear block progression which seems to still be pretty popular? I think I'm just having a hard time seeing the individual classical blocks (accumulation, transmutation, etc), within the various combinations of programs (i.e., #29, 30, 31, etc). I realize I may be overthinking this one, but I think it helps to understand the logic behind the program, or at least attempt to understand it. Thanks in advance.

[benburgess]

Athos, this is something me and Battista were having a natter about the other day, he is much more up on what Block Periodisation is than i am but as far as i can see, if you look at a lot of the work you would do on a classic Sheiko sequence e.g. 29, 37, 32 there are a lot of the features of acumulation (e.g. 4x5 @ 70%, or the big bench pyramids) on early weeks in 29 and 37) transmutation (typically 5x3 @ 80%) and then realisation (your 85-95% singles and doubles in the last week of 37 and 1st week of 32).

The difference between how Boris sets them up and how the traditional linear block scheme sets it up (not that i have any experience of it really) is that Sheiko's accumulation/transmutation/realisation blocks overlap very much and you sometimes dip into one then come back to another.

In all honesty this isnt something i care about or even think about very much. I am much more interested in the maths of it - the way I see it, no other bigger scientifically recorded experiment on powerlifting performance has ever been conducted than in the USSR in the 80's and 90's...we know the method (however you want to label it) works. So i am more interested in knowing the maths behind the method. Sheikos book states that the critical range is in RI...and that an RI of between 67 and 70% is the ideal for building strength IIRC.

When you run a cycle like #29 where the RI is 68 and a #30 where the RI is 69% you can see that the 1% difference makes a huge change to intensity (assuming the total number of lifts is the same - incidentally the total lifts on #30 is almost 300 higher than #29 which when you add that to the increase in RI explains why there is such a huge difference in their application).

The problem is finding the 'sweet spot' for you personally with the balance between total lifts and RI - obviously if you run cycle A which has 1500 lifts at 68.6% and cycle B which has 800 lifts at 68.6%, although the RI is the same, the stress on your body and CNS will be very very different. I guess this is where the rating system comes in although the many different charts and the advent of eqp makes that difficult and also I dont know if we understand precisely where each cycle is pitched in terms of rating. From what i remember of teh Belayev cycles the RI was still around 67-70% but the volume was biggety big style.

By the way Mark, the 'usual' way of using eqp with the cycles is something like:

70% - old suit straps down OR wraps only
80% - old suit, straps down + old wraps
85% - same, maybe tighter wraps
90% - old suit, straps up + old wraps
95%+ - full battle rattle

With shirts i think most people just use a looser shirt that they can touch say 70-80% in for training and only throw the meet shirt on for 90% +

[Deleted]

Ben you are a wealth of knowledge! I appreciate your response - very helpful to me.
What you mentioned about #29/#30 is something thats has me confused. As I understood it, #29-32 were designed to work together, #29 really isn't bad, but #30 will nearly kill you. It just doesn't seem like #30 belongs in that sequence, although they are both for rated lifters? I think for now I'll stick to the advice on here and avoid that particular cycle. Thanks again!

[benburgess]

Mate almost everything I know is from chewing stuff over with Joel & Dave they both much smarter then what I am.

I agree with you regarding 29-32...the difference between 29 and 30 is huge. SPSW has shown that even a lifter with a very high rating can still make bullit gains off cycles with less volume and intensity

[spsfw]

Another great resource, of course, is Eric's dvd of his seminar.
I am no sports scientist and all I know is gathered from information derived from Sheiko's book, an article or two as well as general literature on strength and conditioning.
In an attempt to add a little more for Mark's first question, here is my basic understanding:
I think its Eric who points out that the greatest gains made by lifters initially are made through the development of muscular strength and condition, but significantly by increased neural efficiency. I have seen studies that note, not surprisingly, that with beginners you get a huge improvement in the first few months of training. Many put this down to initial adaptation which results an increase in muscular strength and basic skill acquisition, but often people seem to place a great emphasis on muscle growth. The interesting thing is that when they examine changes in muscle tissue they find that they are not as significant as many would expact- it turns out that the neural pattern development and learning is actually a huge part of the improvement- often much more so that muscle growth. The more neurologically complex a movement, the more improvement is rapidly gained through repetition, which reinforces and builds 'skill'. A crude anaology would be a kid learning to throw a ball- they'll throw it further by learning the skill, rather than just working the muscles involved. Most of us get no where close to harnessing the strength we have due to inefficiencies- repetition improves and increases efficiency. Of course improvements that lead to great power output also have a positive impact on muscular strength. This is all basic sports science. But, the Russians researched their butts off looking at the optimal levels of adaptation/variation to build strength, as well as volume/loading. We know that in response to challnge the body adapts- it gets stronger, but we reach a point where gains decrease and fruther gains require further challenge- this is where variation comes in. How much variation is needed- it turns out not much. So the variation (reps/loads) you find in Sheiko is all about just the right amount to challenge the body to promote strength gains, with this balanced against the need for specificity to build skill. It should be noted that, on my understanding, the various reps/loads are not simply about variation or building volume with the goal of skill acquistion, but also address a variety of needs that relate to the idea of a well rounded athlete/lifter- so this includes conditioning, hypertrophy, power, strength etc. They also found that for most lifters in the early to intermediate stages strength is most effectively built by increasing volume. If you look at the 13 week cycle for example, you see the prep part is repeated with increasing volume- in theory a lifter would continue to build volume as they make their way up the lifter classifications. Then they often reach a stage where they may respond better to increased intensity or different forms of variation- ie a greater variety of lifts.
My understanding is that the science gives a picture of optimal strength development based on a generalised notion of a lifter. All of the programming is all about packing in the most volume in a way that will build skill and produce optimal strength gains via supercompensation- so accummulating fatigue in a way that will result in maximal adaptation.
If you look through the templates with this way of thinking- you'll see patterns- waving loads and volume- this is all based on the generalised picture that they get from the mountains of research they did. To move beyond the generalised picture you need to develop a sense of what works for you, as Dave says, but the smart starting point is the template. You then move little by little towards an understanding of what you respond to. Someone like Dave is a huge asset to us here because he has worked with so many lifters, he has developed a very good understanding of how to best address individual needs.
The question about suits and shirts relates to all this in some ways. Straps down will increase the strength related training effect, straps up will address skill related issues- if squatting in full gear is a goal. I think the answer is in what you are trying to do in a specific part of your training. With shirts- you can get a looser shirt- which will build strength related areas- or stick with the comp shirt and work on skill in that shirt. Of course, its not that simple, and either way offers something more than this- but I think you see what I mean.

[Deleted]

wow steve,

what a great reply! do you have any of these reports [for want of a better term] that has the research in them so we all can read?

thanks,

mark

[spsfw]

I have been collecting bits and peices over the last couple of years- mainly basic stuff like research into amounts of sets, degree of specificity, loading and neural patterns from journals- I am lucky here because I work in a university and have access to all the databases etc- I can track all that down and forward it on as most is in pdf format. There is an article or two from Sheiko floating around, as well as bits from an email. I have them somewhere. All the basic stuff on specificity and adaptation is covered in Zatsiorsky and Kraemer's Science and Practice of Strength Training, there is some interesting stuff on loading, specificty and strength in Pavel's beyond bodybuilding and power to the people- I have these in pdf as well. The rest comes from Eric's dvds and from discussions with Dave, Eric, Joel and Ben.

[Deleted]

hi,

would you be able to atatch the the pdf's here, or would you have to email them?

mark

[spsfw]

well- if I attach the pdfs here I will be in breach of copyright . . .

[Deleted]

oh, i forgot. no worries.

mark

[Deleted]

Awesome SP! Would love to read all your correlated info!
Ive been trying to do the same! But work and life always gets in the way and my info
in writing is all over the place just as bad as the ideas are in my head!
Your spiel to Mark makes great reading even on the 3rd go.. Anyone who says our chosen
sport is simply brute strength should talk to you.