Why strength athletes should be doing conditioning
Word Count: 1400
Introduction:
Conditioning or cardio of any sort is often feared by strength and power athletes, due to the belief that conditioning will counteract gains in size and strength. I’d like to propose the idea that cardio doesn’t kill gains but can benefit strength and power athletes. Now I’m not suggesting for a second that lifters should go out and hit the road or sign up for a mini-marathon but instead, include some low-intensity aerobic conditioning to supplement their strength training. I know this may sound too good to be true but please bear with me and I’ll shed light on the common misconceptions regarding strength and aerobic conditioning, the potential benefits cardio can have on strength and the best conditioning modalities for strength athletes.
Training for both strength and endurance within a periodised programme is referred to as concurrent training, although this is common in many sports (rugby, rowing, cycling, etc.) this is far from the norm in strength sports (weightlifting & powerlifting). As by definition, these sports are predicated on how much weight you can lift for 1 repetition, thereby requiring little endurance. Again, I’d like to highlight that strength athletes shouldn’t be training both strength and endurance concurrently. Their primary focus should be on strength development with supplementary aerobic conditioning used as a tool to aid in the acquisition of strength.
But how is this possible, you ask
Read below to find out how
Misconceptions:
General broscience knowledge tells us that cardio can negatively affect increases in strength and size, this theory either comes from ancient scriptures passed down from our lord Arnold or by Hinkson’s work in the 1980’s 1. Hinkson highlighted an interference effect and a reduced ability to develop strength when simultaneously training strength and endurance qualities 1. Although there is a heap of scientific literature supporting the interference effect 2–6, the strength and endurance abilities of elite rowers or rugby players questions the validity of this theory. Elite Olympic rowers are often considered some of the most well-conditioned athletes on the planet, boasting VO2max scores over 6.1.l/min and squat and deadlift scores close to double bodyweight 7,8. A double bodyweight squat and deadlift may not seem earth shattering but when lifting weights isn’t your primary focus, and you stand 195cm tall and weight 95kg it holds a little more weight 9.
See what I did there, cue laughter.
Similarly impressive feats are seen in rugby, with professional NRL players boasting 144.5kg (± 15.1) bench press scores, yet these athletes are still able to tackle, dodge, change direction and run around a pitch for 80 minutes 10. I’m not recommending that strength athletes take up rowing or rugby, but merely highlighting the fact that it is possible to be aerobically fit and strong.
As the name implies, strongmen are generally quite strong, Winwood tested 6 strongmen, 4 national and 2 regional level athletes (body mass = 112.9 ± 28.9), for deadlift 1 repetition maxes (1RM) (238.3 ± 22.3) and squat 1RMs (210 ± 59.1) 11,12. Despite these impressive feats of strength, these athletes often use conditioning based modalities to supplement their strength training. Furthermore, strongman activities offer themselves as a potential conditioning modality for other strength and power athletes.
The Science:
Without getting too deep into the science, when you perform strength training your body produces specific proteins, mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) is one such protein. MTOR is a key protein in activating muscle protein synthesis and signalling a hypertrophy response to resistance training 2,3,5. Equally, when you perform endurance based exercise your body also produces specific proteins which help adaptions occur. Activated protein kinase (AMPK) is also one such protein. Research suggests that AMPK can inhibit mTOR activation and thus, reduce muscle protein synthesis, thereby negatively affecting potential strength adaptions 2,3,5. Although, this is only one of many molecular pathways for adaptation and shouldn’t be considered in isolation.
Hopefully your still awake after that brief physiology lesson, now time for the juicy stuff.
The benefits of Conditioning:
Death risk – The biggest physiological killer of gains bar none, is death! Those who have greater exercise capacity (METs) have a less relative risk of dying, specifically from cardiovascular disease 13. Furthermore, fitness (VO2 max) levels are a better predictor of death risk than smoking, diabetes, high cholesterol or high blood pressure 14.
Longer life - Think because you lift weights your super healthy, think again! A review article by Reimers, Knapp, and Reimers (2012) 15 analysed 11 different studies which assessed the life expectancy of former athletes. The authors found that aerobic endurance athletes tend to live 4.3 – 8 years longer than control subjects. Whereas, power athletes lived 1.6 years longer than controls. A longer life expectancy means more years lifting or coaching; that means more gains all round.
Quicker recovery – Although lifting heavy weights for 1 maximum repetition primarily utilises the ATP-PCr energy pathway, when we sit down between sets to sip on a protein shake our bodies recover using the aerobic system 16. So, if we have a more efficient aerobic system, over time we can get more sets done per workout or more training sessions done in a training cycle.
Increased work capacity – This ties into the point above and refers to the amount of work (reps, sets, sessions) per unit of time and is commonly referred to as general physical preparation (GPP). Traditional Soviet weightlifting GPP work encompassed light conditioning, with an emphasis on building work capacity so the athletes could tolerate longer training sessions with less of a decline in performance 17,18.
Body composition – Weight class sports (weightlifting, powerlifting, strongman) are determined by an athlete’s strength to bodyweight ratio (E.g. Sinclair & Wilks). An athlete’s force production (strength) is largely dictated by the amount contractile tissue (muscle mass) they possess. Carrying a large excess of body fat in a weight class sports directly limits potential performance. This is even more important in the lighter weight classes, where every kg matters. Obviously, body composition is massively influenced by one’s diet and nutritional intake. Conditioning is a supplementary strategy to spend additional calories and encourage a more favourable body composition.
Active recovery – If programmed correctly, light conditioning or active recovery sessions may help to speed up recovery between sessions. For example, 20-30mins @ 130-150HR using low impact concentric focused activities such as swimming, bike or cross trainer.
Mental Health - Conditioning may offer a psychological break from the stresses and rigours heavy max effort strength training. Conditioning also produces feel-good endorphins which encourage a more positive mental outlook on life and training.
Conditioning recommendations:
As previously mentioned, conditioning for strength and power athletes should supplement their sports training.
Under no circumstances should conditioning interfere or detract from strength & power training!
Programming:
Like strength training, conditioning should be periodised throughout the training cycle, placing a greater emphasis on conditioning during the offseason or GPP phases of training. With frequency gradually decreasing as competition approaches and removed completely during the specific competition preparation phases. Ideally, coaches should attempt to separate conditioning from strength training, as training two conflicting qualities together won’t encourage optimal adaptions to occur 19. A recovery period of 6+ hours should separate sessions, with rest days presenting as an ideal opportunity to include some light conditioning.
Type:
The optimal types of conditioning are low impact, concentric focused conditioning modalities. Eccentric exercises result in a greater level of muscle damage (DOMS) and creatine kinase 20 and thus, offer greater potential to interfere with strength training. Coaches should favour the bike, rower, cross trainer, sleds, swimming and ski erg as they impose less eccentric forces compared to running based alternatives. Strongman training presents as a relatively specific and enjoyable form of concentric focused conditioning for strength and power athletes, but once again, I must caution against taking it too far.
Summary:
Strength athletes should use conditioning to increase longevity and recovery ability, as a rough guideline, they should strive to get their resting heart rate between 50 – 65 bmp. Conditioning should be performed with the goal to aid in the acquisition of strength while maintaining a sufficient caloric intake to support, sustain and recover from training. The increases in life expectancy, recovery ability between sessions and work capacity may also help aid performance.
In summary, strength and power athletes shouldn’t fear conditioning, but instead, appreciate that if it is programmed correctly and thoughtfully, it can offer performance benefits. Again, I must stress that athletes are only seeking subtle health benefits and not looking to become a marathon runner.
More is not always better!
References:
1. Hickson, R. C. Interference of strength development by simultaneously training for strength and endurance. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 45, 255–263 (1980).
2. Fyfe, J. J., Bishop, D. J. & Stepto, N. K. Interference between concurrent resistance and endurance exercise: molecular bases and the role of individual training variables. Sports Med 44, 743–762 (2014).
3. Hawley, J. A. Molecular responses to strength and endurance training: are they incompatible? Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 34, 355–361 (2009).
4. Jones, T. W., Howatson, G., Russell, M. & French, D. N. Performance and neuromuscular adaptations following differing ratios of concurrent strength and endurance training. J Strength Cond Res 27, 3342–3351 (2013).
5. Nader, G. A. Concurrent strength and endurance training: from molecules to man. Med Sci Sports Exerc 38, 1965–1970 (2006).
6. Wilson, J. M. et al. Concurrent training: a meta-analysis examining interference of aerobic and resistance exercises. J Strength Cond Res 26, 2293–2307 (2012).
7. McNeely, E. How strong is strong enough. Rowing Canada Magazine 24, 24–26 (2001).
8. Tran, J., Rice, A. J., Main, L. C. & Gastin, P. B. Profiling the Training Practices and Performance of Elite Rowers. International Journal of Sports Physiology & Performance 10, 572–580 (2015).
9. Volianitis, S. & Secher, N. H. Rowing, the ultimate challenge to the human body – implications for physiological variables. Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging 29, 241–244 (2009).
10. Baker, D. Differences in Strength and Power Among Junior-High, Senior-High, College-Aged, and Elite Professional Rugby League Players: Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 16, 581–585 (2002).
11. Winwood, P. W., Cronin, J. B., Brown, S. R. & Keogh, J. W. L. A Biomechanical Analysis of the Farmers Walk, and Comparison with the Deadlift and Unloaded Walk. International journal of Sports Science & Coaching 9, 1127–1143 (2014).
12. Winwood, P. W., Cronin, J. B., Brown, S. R. & Keogh, J. W. L. A Biomechanical Analysis of the Heavy Sprint-Style Sled Pull and Comparison with the Back Squat. International journal of Sports Science & Coaching 10, 851–868 (2015).
13. Myers, J. Exercise and Cardiovascular Health. Circulation 107, e2–e5 (2003).
14. Myers, J. et al. Exercise capacity and mortality among men referred for exercise testing. N. Engl. J. Med. 346, 793–801 (2002).
15. Reimers, C. D., Knapp, G. & Reimers, A. K. Does Physical Activity Increase Life Expectancy? A Review of the Literature. Journal of Aging Research 2012, e243958 (2012).
16. Gastin, P. b. Energy System Interaction and Relative Contribution During Maximal Exercise. Sports Medicine 31, 725–741 (2001).
17. Drechsler, A. J. The weightlifting encyclopedia: A guide to world class performance. (A is a communications, 1998).
18. Verkhoshansky, Y. & Siff, M. C. Supertraining. (Verkhoshansky, 2009).
19. Robineau, J., Babault, N., Piscione, J., Lacome, M. & Bigard, A. X. Specific Training Effects of Concurrent Aerobic and Strength Exercises Depend on Recovery Duration. J Strength Cond Res 30, 672–683 (2016).
20. Nosaka, K. & Newton, M. Concentric or eccentric training effect on eccentric exercise-induced muscle damage. Med Sci Sports Exerc 34, 63–69 (2002).