muscle fiber activation theroy

[vegetus25]

I was reading a theory on muscle fiber activation the other day. The theory was that higher tension and faster reps were the key to activating as many muscle fibers as possible. The author (Chad Waterbury) said if you lift a light weight only a small amount of “smaller” muscle fibers will be activated to move the weight. As you do more and more reps these smaller fibers will get tried and some will stop working (which is why you lose strength as the reps add up). He said when lifting a small weight you will never engage the “larger” muscle fibers because the mind does not perceive a need to use them. He argued against the idea that as the muscle gets tired the larger fibers would be called upon. He said if that were true we would get stronger as a set continued and not weaker.

The practical application of this was to lift heavier (or in our case use more tension) weights and lift them faster to develop more size and strength. He said he thought you needed to use approximately 50-60% (or more) of you one rep max to engage the larger fibers. He also recommended varying the amount of weight (tension) used, the number of reps, and the exercises performed from workout to workout.

When I read this theory (and I probably am not doing it justice here) it seemed to make sense to me. Why would the mind activate the larger fibers if it did not perceive a need for them at the beginning? It also made sense that the larger fibers do not come into play later in a set as the small fibers get tired, since there is not a huge strength gain towards the end of a set.

I have been playing w/ this theory a bit. I am performing faster reps on some Power Cals and am also experimenting w/ performing “fast” (a bit tricky, but I try to move fast while keeping myself from moving fast) reps w/ high tension DVR’s. There is a different feel than when I just do high tension DVR’s.

It seems many high volume push-up guys have performed their reps fast. I wonder if the above might explain part of their success.

I would like to hear your comments about this.

Thanks and God bless,

Veg

[Andy62]

The following quote by John Peterson, referring to an article by Larry Scott, deals with the same concept concerning isometrics and the synapse effect:





"What Mr. Scott is referring to here is the 'synapse' effect of Isometric contraction as was discovered by the scientists at the Max Planck Institute in Dortmond, Germany in the late 1940's and studied throughout the 1950's into the 1960's. New studies are now being conducted that verify the original studies. The idea is that by directed thought and the conscious contraction of the muscle fibers directly without relying on apparatus, more and more muscle fibers become activated by nerve stimulus and the 'arcing' effect from one neuron to another which ultimately means that with time and practice the entire muscle can be stimulated and contracted at one time. It's kind of like this, whether you drive your car at 5 miles an hour or 100 miles an hour, your car's engine hits on all cylanders. Unfortunately, that's not the way the human muscular system works unless it is trained that way. For instance, if one were to pick up a pencil, just a few muscle fibers would be activated, a newspaper, a few more, a gallon of milk still more. With Isometrics we use our mind to contract our muscles with greater and greater intensity. This was why the original Isometric Studies showed such phenomenal increases in strength so rapidly. In short, people were learning to use far more muscle fibers at any given time for any given exertion which corresponded to a direct increase in strength."
---John Peterson

Last edited by John Peterson on Tue Oct 17, 2006 5:47 pm; edited 1 time in total

[Kevin Nickerson]

In the magazine ON FITNESS there is and article on blitzing not with weights but push ups.The article was talking about doing them as fast and as many as you can do resting 3 seconds then doing another set as many as you can do rest another 3 seconds if cant do regular do them on knees for another set continue until another set impossible.

[vegetus25]

Thanks Andy,

I remember reading that post.

I guess what I found new in Mr. Waterbury's theory was small and large muscle fibers. I always thought we had muscle fibers and we used more and more as needed, but not that we had larger ones that were kept in reserve for when we were using a lot of tension or weight.

One other thing he said I found interesting was using a light weight or tension and burning out on reps may feel like a lot of work, but that it is actually not as productive as lifting more weight (or using more tension), but not training to failure. The former (again, if I have his ideas right) will cause more damage to the smaller fibers that are used, will make you sore, and will increase the amount of time you need to take off, but will not produce as much size and strength gain. By using more weight (or tension) and trying to move faster you will bring the larger fibers into play from the beginning which will produce more size and strength gains. But w/o as much damage to the muscle fibers. Therefore, you will not be sore (or as sore) and can workout more often. He said to end a set when your reps slow down.

I know from personal experience I need more recovery time between workouts when I do exercises to failure vs. performing the same number of reps (or many more), but dividing them into more sets and staying away from failure.

[divebomber]

vegetus, from a purely logical point of view, Waterbury's theory makes sense.

However, there is also the conflicting idea that performing reps slowly while consciously flexing your muscles makes them more challenging and result-producing (uttered e. g. by Pavel in "Naked Warrior" but also by historic greats like Alexander Zass). From practical experience, I do feel that the latter concept does have a point - slowing down my reps not only brings down the numbers (which is to be expected), but also TUT - maybe because of the continuous tension applied to the muscle?

I really don't know whom to believe. My solution is to use different tempos. In any case, the closer the resistance is to your personal best, the less important does the actual movement speed become. When doing a very challenging calisthenics move where you are only able to do a handful of reps, or when doing a max tension DVR, all that counts is the INTENTION to move fast, as you won't be able to actually move fast anyways.

[Andy62]

I admit that I am biased toward Isometrics and DVRs. Isometrics have had such a job done on them as a result of Bob Hoffman mixing them with steriods that we are just now starting to appreciate their maximum potential. I would suggest that you try different things and see what works best for you. These are a number of experts though that recommend isometrics for speed and explosiveness in addition to strength.

[Flash11740]

I once stumbled onto a clip on YouTube by The National Geographic Channel (you can probably find it if you search hard enough). It was exploring cases of people who lift huge weights in emergency situations, you know like the mother that lifts the car of her trapped kid, stuff like that.

They had a graphic of this rock climber who was trapped under a huger flat boulder which was sliding towards a cliff edge. The boulder was approx 1.5x the world bench press record (from memory), yet this 160lbs guy was able to flip it off him and arrest his slide.

The scientific theory was that when we consciously invoke our muscles to lift something, say for argument the chest and arms, then we're only able to call on 1/3rd of the fibers present with up to 80% intensity. However in life or death emergency situations we can call on ALL the fibers at once, with 100% intensity. This is not particularly good for us, but in a life or death situation that's not really relevant. The brain achieves this by sending out particular chemical messengers.

Anyhow, the upshot is that someone training 3x each week will actually be using a different set of fibers each time. Think of this with regards to pushups. The average person has roughly a 1 week recovery time for each set of fibers. If you train pushups 3x a week then you will utilise all three sets of fibers when they are in tip top condition, fray them a little, then give them a week to rebuild. Hitting them more than 3x a week might at best produce diminishing returns or even be counter productive.

All this is from memory, so if you are interested you really need to watch this clip, it's probably 12-18 months ago that I saw it once. Was food for thought anyway.

[douglis]

"By using more weight (or tension) and trying to move faster you will bring the larger fibers into play from the beginning which will produce more size and strength gains. But w/o as much damage to the muscle fibers. Therefore, you will not be sore (or as sore) and can workout more often. He said to end a set when your reps slow down.

I know from personal experience I need more recovery time between workouts when I do exercises to failure vs. performing the same number of reps (or many more), but dividing them into more sets and staying away from failure."

I agree but that's only one part of the equation.Strength and size gains are also highly depended from the metabolic response of the muscle which is much greater going closer to failure.I guess everyone has to find how much must push himself without overtraining.
I think that with isokinetic training (VRT belongs to that category) you can use both maximum contractions and you can give to your training sets enough TUT to produce metabolites.

[Big Bear]

Hi Veg,

Great post and great discussion everyone!

What works for me is to have max days once or twice a week and the other days higher reps with less tension.On Max days I will use enough tension that I the arms or legs are moving very slowly and then follow with iso's.This workout can be very,very intense!

Now as far as moving heavy weights fast,if we are looking for replication would it be possibe to add intensity to a pushup and then do it plometrically for the same result you are talking about?.For instance Atlas 2's and then explode up and clap the hands.I am in full agreement with other writers that plyo's should not be employed until one is in good physical condition and then not used everyday(they can be rough on the joints).We had a student that was an excellant basketball player-on the way to a small div.1 school but ended up hurting himself as he was literally addicted to plo's and wouldn't stop using them daily-though warned.He has learned and is okay now.

Again,great thread,great discussion,very thought provoking.

peace,
jason

[tony84]

Great discussion. The only problem i have with the article, is that there is really no such thing as large and small fibers. There are fast and slow twitch muscles fibers. There are always debates about whether there are more but those are the main two. In theory if you life lighter weights with more reps, the slow twitch muscles fibers are getting work, if you work heavy with fewer reps, you work the fast twitch. Thats the theory at least. I have seen many debates on whether lifting fast recruits more fibers, which could be good for strength. I think if your goal is adding size, working slow would be better.

Tony

[Bruno]

Chad Waterbury seems to be channeling Arthur Jones.

Proper warm up because cold muscles will not allow for proper muscle recruitment.

Fast movements in the beginning of the set in perfect form leading to slower movements and only after that a few reps cheating. Try it with pull ups. Fast pull ups to slow and deliberate maybe 3 counts up and then down and then a few kipping pull ups to get all you can from the muscles.

[vegetus25]

I think I might have had it wrong. I thing Mr. Waterbury was talking about large and small motor units.

Here is an article I found:


http://vuesdumonde.forumactif.com/exercices-et-conditionnement-physiques-exercises-and-conditioning-f31/get-huge-in-a-hurry-chad-waterbury-tells-you-how-t8051.htm

Thanks for all the replies

[Viking Dan]

Great discussion. The only problem i have with the article, is that there is really no such thing as large and small fibers. There are fast and slow twitch muscles fibers.

Not to further confuse the issue, but fast twitch have much more potential for size increase than slow twitch, so one could call them large fibers, I guess.