HIT Training 101

            The universal problem with the health/fitness industry is a deplorable lack of understanding the scientific basics of building a muscle.  Every exercise should have a goal that it is attempting to reach; however, much of what is taught is bogged down in a quagmire of ludicrous methodology. 

            This sort of thinking can be found in the following statement: ""The problem with the bench, with traditional squats and the kinds of exercises I refer to as ‘beach gorilla’ exercises, is that they don’t correlate to anything in football or life,” says Pittsburgh Steelers All-Pro safety Troy Polamalu.  Instead of emptying the weight rack, he uses light weights, an exercise ball, and moves that draw from Pilates and physical therapy to build a leaner, faster, and more powerful body…¹”   

            The more I listen to the false claims of advertisers and disingenuous statements such as Polamalu’s; I cannot help but to shake my head in disbelief.  Unfortunately, these methods are employed in a consistent circular pattern, which move from the so-called "expert”, in this case, Marv Marinovich of Sports Lab in San Juan Capistrano, California.  In our American culture, it seems as though all one needs to do to be successful is present the new fad or new fangled item to the sports/health/fitness industry and you’ve got a  participant willing to drink the poisoned kool-aid.

            The French philosopher, Voltaire, once said, "If you’re going to debate with me then define your terms.”  I will attempt to dissect certain terminology from the aforementioned quote but before I do this, I want to give the absolute basics of building a muscle.

            A muscle must recognize a threat (weight lifting) to the body; therefore, it must adapt to the demand imposed upon it and involve all available muscle fibers to assist in lifting the weight while moving to absolute failure.  It is attempting to build a defense (added muscle) in order to conquer the resistance the next time it is encountered.  It has done all that it can with the current available fibers, added more ensures its survival.  Absolute failure is critical here.  To exercise at a lighter weight, increased repetitions and a lack of going to failure will cause the body to ignore a stimulus (weight lifting) that it does not recognize as a threat.

            Muscle fibers split, producing the fruit of newfound growth during rest and therefore increased muscle mass.  One set is the minimum needed to produce growth.  It is unnecessary to reintroduce a stimulus a second, third or fourth time, ad infinitum.  It is akin to planting a seed in the ground in the hopeful expectation of fruitful growth.  The ground is the stimuli and the process of the breakdown of the seed is the stimulus.  It should never need to be dug up again to reintroduce it to the same stimulus.  The best-intentions of "doing more” or putting in "more effort”  needs to be met with fierce resistance (no pun intended) so that growth is not hampered by multiple stimulus’s resulting in focus overload, and therefore delayed recuperation.  It’s like taking in too much information that cannot be retained and put to proper use.

            Keep this in mind as I assess what Polamalu is saying: he states that the fundamental exercises such as a bench press and squat are merely ‘beach gorilla’ exercises that "don’t correlate to anything in football or life.”  How in the world could this not "correlate” to football?  When college athletes offer themselves up for the NFL draft, they are invited to the Indianapolis combine in which they are put through a battery of tests.  One such test is the ‘beach gorilla’ bench press, in which participants must perform as many repetitions as possible with 225 lbs.  Do you think that this might "correlate” to football?  Can you imagine an NFL scout reporting to his employer that a particular offensive lineman could only bench press 135 lbs.?  Just to put this in perspective, most of these guys are in the 500 lb. range.  Do you still think this doesn’t "correlate”?  These guys need to be strong in order to battle defensive lineman who are either just as strong or more agile or both.  How about this, what if it was reported that Polamalu could only bench 135 lbs.?  Do you think that would ‘correlate’ to his draft standing or durability in the midst of a sixteen game season in the NFL?  Of course, it correlates.  It is absurd to think otherwise.  If strength did not matter, then anyone would be eligible for the NFL.

            In regards to ‘beach gorilla’ exercises not correlating "to anything…in life,” I must say this is another preposterous statement!  I am aware of Polamalu’s devotion to God and would conclude that his desire must be one of overcoming all obstacles that stand in the way of a deeper and richer devotion to him.  Is there a correlation?  I think so.  Not only in the arena of Godly devotion but also in life there are so many obstacles and problems that arise.  As we persevere in conquering each seemingly impossible task, we grow stronger.  Another correlation?  I think so.

            The writer, Steve Volk, describes Polamalu’s work out as one designed "to build a leaner, faster, and more powerful body.”  What does he mean by "leaner”?  Does he mean that he must reduce his muscle mass in order to be "faster and more powerful”?  If so, why would you eliminate the very causation of your speed and power?  Everything starts with the muscle.  Can you recall what the quadriceps of an Olympic sprinter looks like?  What sane coach would honestly turn to his athlete-in-training and say, "Hey, we’ve got to reduce that muscle to make you faster”?  Again, it is the very causation of his speed.  Simply avoiding weight training altogether will accomplish that.    

            If he means that he is changing his body composition by means of a high repetition work out in order to reduce fat then this is also wrong on all counts.  A feeling such as a burning sensation in the muscle does not mean that it is burning fat.  It is simply a by-product of lifting weight; lactic acid build-up.  Contrary to popular opinion, this aerobic type of activity does not place high demands on the muscle.  What does, is a high intensity workout with a proper calorie intake that places great demands on glycogen consumption for use of energy.  When larger muscles are built, there is more storage room available for glycogen, reducing its chance of being stored as a triglyceride in fat tissue.

            As for becoming more powerful, remember what was said earlier.  The muscle must recognize a perceived threat in order to produce growth.  Doing Pilates with rubber band resistance and incorporating the weakest of the muscle fibers, the slow twitch, with an endless succession of repetitions will not produce growth in relation to power.  I don’t know about you but if I had a preference, I would rather get hit on the field from the guy doing the rubber band resistance work out than the guy who is dead lifting 600 lbs.  I promise you that one will deliver a much more considerable wallop than the other.

            I do want to state that I think Polamalu is an excellent athlete and a phenomenal safety.  His on-field athletics speak for itself.  The only problem is that an ill-informed person can become the spokesperson for scientific invalidity and draw others into the same misconception.  I find his statements sad because an athlete of his caliber, with the proper training advice, could only vastly improve his ability.

            The genetic freak bench-pressing 500 lbs. for set after set could only become more powerful with the same proper training.  I’ll take the weakest guy on the team and transform his current totals towards heights he never knew existed.  Heck, give me the kicker or the placeholder, that's fine with me, or better yet, give me Troy Polamalu!