'Banking' strength gains

Bruce7

I am not sure if this makes sense or not. But, based on the fact that sooner or later everyone stops getting stronger, whether due to age, time, money, genetics, injury, or whatever, I am wondering what the best way is to lock in certain levels of strength, or in other words, focus on not getting weaker instead of getting stronger.

E.g. I could go on the piss for a year and I don't think I would ever be unable to do a few sets with say, 60kg on the bench, or 80kg squats. If I go back to the gym, after a few months, I'd probably be benching 100kg for 3-5 easily enough, but I'd lose this strength pretty quickly as well.

So what is the best way to lock in and maintain strength gains so that you have them for a while, or so that they can be maintained easily enough? I have an idea that if you can do 3 x 10 with a certain weight, then, in a way, you 'own' that weight, but I am aware that this isn't really based on anything.

Does something like this make sense?

Strength phase: 3 months of 3-5 rep range, constantly increasing weight followed by
Consolidation phase: 3 months with the weight heaviest weight lifted, trying to increase reps, followed by
Another strength phase, etc

I suppose this kind of applies to sports with an off season, during which you might want to build up your strength as much as possible, then an on-season where you just want to maintain it.

Hope this is at least coherent, if not sensible.

Hanley

It doesn't work like that...

You always lose strength in proportion to max strength levels. I stopped benching (and all lifting really in favour of BJJ) for the best part of 8-9 months and could still rep 100+ when I came back. That happened because I'd benched like 140x5 before.

Easiest way to "lock in" a certain level of strength is just to get really strong in the first place.

Bruce7

Hanley wrote: »

It doesn't work like that...

You always lose strength in proportion to max strength levels. I stopped benching (and all lifting really in favour of BJJ) for the best part of 8-9 months and could still rep 100+ when I came back. That happened because I'd benched like 140x5 before.

Easiest way to "lock in" a certain level of strength is just to get really strong in the first place.

Ok, gotcha, thanks.

So say you wanted to focus on BJJ but at the same time you didn't want your bench to go below, for example, 120 x 5. What would be the minimum you could do to keep it at this level?

I'm guessing you'll say do sets of 120 x 5, but how often would you need to do them?

dartstothesea

How often you can do them is a measure of strength (without being pedantic) in itself... So ask yourself how often you want to be able to do them.

I'd have thought this is as simple as the stronger you are, the longer it takes for you to end up weak again, all else being equal.

Hanley

dartstothesea wrote: »

How often you can do them is a measure of strength (without being pedantic) in itself... So ask yourself how often you want to be able to do them.

I'd have thought this is as simple as the stronger you are, the longer it takes for you to end up weak again, all else being equal.

...now you have to define "weak"

Even in my weakest untrained state, there's not many casual gym goes who even at their peak could catch me or other ex powerlifters!

Bruce7

A prop forward in rugby needs to be very strong. They also need to be able to get around the pitch and do a whole load of other things, so during the rugby season, their main focus is on playing rugby.

Let's take a hypothetical example of a prop who wants to increase his strength and focus on nothing but strength during the off season and hang on to as much of those strength gains as possible during the rugby season while he focuses on skills and other areas.

This prop decides that he wants to be able to sqaut 240kg for one rep at all points during the season.

This implies two things:
(i) The ability to squat a certain amount by the end of the off season, and(ii) The ability to maintain a certain percentage of the strength he gained during the offseason.

So what is the best method for achieving this?

Apologies if this sounds like it is meant to be a test of some kind. It's not. I don't know the answer. I'm just trying to frame the discussion clearly.

Hanley

Bruce7 wrote: »

A prop forward in rugby needs to be very strong. They also need to be able to get around the pitch and do a whole load of other things, so during the rugby season, their main focus is on playing rugby.

Let's take a hypothetical example of a prop who wants to increase his strength and focus on nothing but strength during the off season and hang on to as much of those strength gains as possible during the rugby season while he focuses on skills and other areas.

This prop decides that he wants to be able to sqaut 240kg for one rep at all points during the season.

This implies two things:
(i) The ability to squat a certain amount by the end of the off season, and(ii) The ability to maintain a certain percentage of the strength he gained during the offseason.

So what is the best method for achieving this?

Apologies if this sounds like it is meant to be a test of some kind. It's not. I don't know the answer. I'm just trying to frame the discussion clearly.

I get the Q, you've been clear there

I just think it's a bad question - why is it important to lift "x". Esp in a sporting context - other things like the ability to display that strength and your conditioning are more important.

Plus there' the issue of recovery that comes with testing mid season.

Generally the way it goes seems to be post season to recuperate and do prehab, off season/pre season to build as much muscle and strength as possible, then just try to minimise the loss during the season.

You don't have to train THAT much to maintain, a couple of times a week working up to a relatively high percentage for a low number of reps should be enough to limit the loss without effecting the important matter of on the field performance!!

....assuming we're talking elite level professional/semi-pro guys here. For weekend warriors/recreatinoal dudes the rules change a bit.

Bruce7

Hanley wrote: »

I get the Q, you've been clear there

I just think it's a bad question - why is it important to lift "x". Esp in a sporting context - other things like the ability to display that strength and your conditioning are more important.

Plus there' the issue of recovery that comes with testing mid season.

Generally the way it goes seems to be post season to recuperate and do prehab, off season/pre season to build as much muscle and strength as possible, then just try to minimise the loss during the season.

You don't have to train THAT much to maintain, a couple of times a week working up to a relatively high percentage for a low number of reps should be enough to limit the loss without effecting the important matter of on the field performance!!

....assuming we're talking elite level professional/semi-pro guys here. For weekend warriors/recreatinoal dudes the rules change a bit.

Not necessarily elites only. What I am trying to get at is that there is a point for everyone where pursuing further strength gains is either unnecessary, unwise, impractical, or simply impossible.

These limits will obviously vary depending on the person.

I.e. a powerlifter will keep pursuing strength gains until it is impossible for them to get any stronger.

A professional prop forward might have target strength levels for various lifts and see it as unnecessary to get any stronger, as they want to focus on mobility and skills once they are as strong as they need to be (exactly how they determine how strong they need to be isn't the point).

A prop who plays J4 rugby at the weekends and has a full time job and a family might want to be as strong as Cian Healy, but in his case, it might be unwise to try to get stronger than a certain point as it risks injury, or it might be impractical as they don't have enough free time, or it might simply be impossible.

So there are a variety of reasons why someone might decide that they don't want to invest their training time in getting stronger - like you said above, other things are more important - but neither do they want to get any weaker.

Does this sound reasonable, for example? http://www.brettsmith.co.nz/rugby/stmain.htm

• • Strength maintenance programs involve the corresponding strength program (simple, advanced or representative) to be undertaken for one session only per week.

  • Intensity must be kept maximal while volume is held low

  • If you have a good hypertrophy-strength base you should be able to maintain high levels of strength for 6-10 weeks through one strength maintenance session per week

Hanley

Bruce7 wrote: »

Not necessarily elites only. What I am trying to get at is that there is a point for everyone where pursuing further strength gains is either unnecessary, unwise, impractical, or simply impossible.

Yes

I.e. a powerlifter will keep pursuing strength gains until it is impossible for them to get any stronger.

True - tis the nature of the game.

A professional prop forward might have target strength levels for various lifts and see it as unnecessary to get any stronger, as they want to focus on mobility and skills once they are as strong as they need to be (exactly how they determine how strong they need to be isn't the point).

They MIGHT. But they might not. And if they don’t, this whole conversation may be redundant. And since when did strength training preclude skill/mobility training. They all must happen concurrently.

A prop who plays J4 rugby at the weekends and has a full time job and a family might want to be as strong as Cian Healy, but in his case, it might be unwise to try to get stronger than a certain point as it risks injury, or it might be impractical as they don't have enough free time, or it might simply be impossible

.

It’d be impossible - professional players are the genetic elite.

So there are a variety of reasons why someone might decide that they don't want to invest their training time in getting stronger - like you said above, other things are more important - but neither do they want to get any weaker.

I’m gonna say ok on this one because it’s become too conditional to have form of discussion on.

Does this sound reasonable, for example? http://www.brettsmith.co.nz/rugby/stmain.htm

o
• Strength maintenance programs involve the corresponding strength program (simple, advanced or representative) to be undertaken for one session only per week.
  o Intensity must be kept maximal while volume is held low
  o If you have a good hypertrophy-strength base you should be able to maintain high levels of strength for 6-10 weeks through one strength maintenance session per week
  

First 2 sound reasonable, third - no idea.