Home   |   Contact   |   Help

Get Our Newsletter
Sign up for our free newsletter to get training tips and stay up to date on Catalyst Athletics, and get a FREE issue of the Performance Menu journal.

Go Back   Catalyst Athletics Forums > Training > Fitness, Strength & CrossFit

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-11-2009, 03:37 AM   #1
Timothy Holmes
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 221
Default what is work capacity?

I'm training for the decathlon, and in the off-season want to increase my 'work capacity' to make specific training in season more effective.

I understand the CF definition of work capacity (force-distance., broad time and modal), but I want to know more about the more specific work capacity, that is, being able to do more volume without fatigue and with better recovery. Are they the same?

The CF mainpage (the greatest GPP prgram for developing work capacity EVER! ) could be tweaked to be more specific to decathlon training. Maybe by taking out the very long metcons, adding rests (a la Power Bias). How could I make GPP program that would be more beneficial to event training?

In general, training activities (those which contribute directly to performance) are sprinting, event-specific drills and full throws/jumps, strength training (weights and plyos). I have read about PLers doing density training using the three lifts to increase specific work capacity. Do I need to do a similar thing?
__________________
dec log, goals: states '10 - 5600; states '11 - 6400
Timothy Holmes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2009, 08:13 AM   #2
Steven Low
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,091
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Timothy Holmes View Post
I'm training for the decathlon, and in the off-season want to increase my 'work capacity' to make specific training in season more effective.

I understand the CF definition of work capacity (force-distance., broad time and modal), but I want to know more about the more specific work capacity, that is, being able to do more volume without fatigue and with better recovery. Are they the same?
They are one and the same. High intensity training at medium or higher volume tends to allow the body to adapt to physiological conditions of the extreme stress that you put on it so there's less overall damage and you can operate well under such conditions.

Quote:
The CF mainpage (the greatest GPP prgram for developing work capacity EVER! ) could be tweaked to be more specific to decathlon training. Maybe by taking out the very long metcons, adding rests (a la Power Bias). How could I make GPP program that would be more beneficial to event training?
I'd talk to a decathlon coach for that.

I mean, for "PURE" work capacity for the running aspect you should do 400m sprint intervals for your mile training. This will help improve your 400m as well. Kinda stuff like that.

Quote:
In general, training activities (those which contribute directly to performance) are sprinting, event-specific drills and full throws/jumps, strength training (weights and plyos). I have read about PLers doing density training using the three lifts to increase specific work capacity. Do I need to do a similar thing?
I like density training, but for pure GPP I think intervals are more effective especially if you're trying to power bias everything.

What did you do from the last thread you made on the subject? If you can figure out what worked and what didn't that would be a good idea.

http://www.performancemenu.com/forum...ead.php?t=2603
__________________
Posts NOT intended as professional medical, training or nutrition advice.
Site // Bodyweight Strength Training Article // Overcoming Gravity Bodyweight Book
Steven Low is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2009, 04:52 PM   #3
Patrick Yeung
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 139
Default

I think CF is too GPP if youre interested in preparing for a sport. You may be better off like you said doing more specific training program.

I am more familar with Triathlons, and found CrossFitEndurance.com a welcome break to my LSD workouts. Have you checked out their site? Of course, that is only for those who have a good base already, but looking at your sig, youd fit in nicely.
Patrick Yeung is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 01:14 AM   #4
Timothy Holmes
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Low View Post
They are one and the same. High intensity training at medium or higher volume tends to allow the body to adapt to physiological conditions of the extreme stress that you put on it so there's less overall damage and you can operate well under such conditions.

I'd talk to a decathlon coach for that.

I mean, for "PURE" work capacity for the running aspect you should do 400m sprint intervals for your mile training. This will help improve your 400m as well. Kinda stuff like that.
So there's CF WC, which is broad time and blah, and then there is work capacity which is for the 1500m, a narrow time and modal domain? I guess since the decathlon encompasses so much, conditioning should be broad.

Quote:
I like density training, but for pure GPP I think intervals are more effective especially if you're trying to power bias everything.

What did you do from the last thread you made on the subject? If you can figure out what worked and what didn't that would be a good idea.

http://www.performancemenu.com/forum...ead.php?t=2603
Thanks for your post your reply in the thread (and this one), Steven. Useful advice still and as always.

I've found that technical training is king. I've done very little training with a barbell in the last three months (x1 a week tops), but I'm still setting PBs in most events. In the field events, it's due to improved technique, but since I've neglected conditioning a bit, training and competing has become a bit harder. I expect that it will even more dramatic as I learn to use a higher proportion of my physical abilities (strength, speed...). Also, they will contribute more to performance too. I'm trying to learn from my mistake - build my conditioning and make sure that I do something to maintain it closer to/through the season.

Sprinting has been working very well. 60m is now my fav distance. Perhaps that's something else I can do that's specific - <60m intervals with short rest (<2'). What do you think? My only concern is the degrading of form in the later rounds...

I'm trying to keep in mind that I'm a "a decathlete that trains to improve fitness to improve your events, not a 'say CrossFitter' who does decathlons" (Scott K.). I definitely didn't do this late time round.

weights (heavy), MB throws/BW circuit
plyos (light), metcon
weights (light), hill runs
plyos (heavy), MB throws/BW circuit (or rest)
hill runs
weights (heavy), metcon
rest

over 6-9 months (off-season to pre-season):
- weights get heavier (maybe start bilateral focussed and move to unilateral or the other way round?)
- plyos get more intense, add speed work (weights and plyos may need to be alternated in intensity in 3 week blocks)
- MB throws/BW circuit become implement throws and specific event conditioning drills
- hill runs become hill sprints become track intervals (intensity might need to be alternated alongside plyos)
- metcon reduces (volume-wise) to maintenance levels
__________________
dec log, goals: states '10 - 5600; states '11 - 6400
Timothy Holmes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 12:34 PM   #5
Steven Low
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,091
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CF definition
CrossFit is [...] (1) constantly varied (2) functional movement executed at (3) high intensity [which is] measured by increased (4) work capacity across (5) broad time and modal domains
You know, the more I thought about your question (aka what is work capacity?) in the context of CF... the more I think the answer is

"resistance to fatigue" over broad time and modal domains.

This encompasses both the (1) ability of metabolic pathways to supply the body with energy and (2) the ability of the body's muscles/CNS to resist damage and keep operating under stress.

So if I had to say anything I'd definitely say work capacity = the ability of the body to resist fatigue.


---------------------------------------

I like the 60m distance.. although you might need some longer runs for the 1500m unless you're just gonna try to "just do it."

I'd say try it out and see if it works if you can't ask a coach or anything. Looks as good as anything I could produce.
__________________
Posts NOT intended as professional medical, training or nutrition advice.
Site // Bodyweight Strength Training Article // Overcoming Gravity Bodyweight Book
Steven Low is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 09:58 PM   #6
Garrett Smith
Senior Member
 
Garrett Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 4,368
Default

Steven,
I like "resistance to fatigue" much better. That's a great addition--wordy, but a great tweak to the infamous phrase.

One thing I really realized had been discarded from the definition of "work capacity" (which is only measured in vertical displacement) is TORQUE. This is why, as you well know, gymnasts are regarded as having some of the strongest upper bodies in athletics.

Just because torque is harder to quantify and measure doesn't mean it is worthless in fitness. Sorry for thread hijack.
__________________
Garrett Smith NMD CSCS BS, aka "Dr. G"
RepairRecoverRestore.com - Blood, Saliva, and Stool Testing
My radio show - The Path to Strength and Health
Garrett Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 10:03 PM   #7
Steven Low
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,091
Default

That is true Garrett... isometric movements tend to be the "best" examples of how torque can make you strong without any vertical or horizontal displacement of weight.
__________________
Posts NOT intended as professional medical, training or nutrition advice.
Site // Bodyweight Strength Training Article // Overcoming Gravity Bodyweight Book
Steven Low is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2009, 05:43 AM   #8
George Mounce
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 945
Default

To the OP:

CF is great for the off-season, so is working on weak areas. I wouldn't think too much beyond that. During the season though your training should be more specific for your sport. KISS methodology works good here.

To the others:

Torque isn't left out. It is part and parcel to all development. Just because it says "work" doesn't mean it isn't talking about all forces on the body. The bigger brains like you guys will look into that stuff, but for the masses, the words "work" and "power" well, they suffice! I would agree with Steven here that "resistance to fatigue," a.k.a. endurance (of various forms), a.k.a. stamina (again I like one-word descriptors) is a healthy byproduct of high intensity and GPP training.

Now to go all scientific...read this: http://www.scipub.org/fulltext/ajas/...21670-1675.pdf

Excerpt:

Quote:
The result of this research indicates that a little
change in angular velocity in joints leads to
considerable power enhancement of weightlifter. The
finding of this research can help Olympic weightlifters
to modify their techniques and enhance their power by
defining the optimum angular velocity. It is
recommended to extend the presented model by adding
muscular models through combinations of springs and
dampers which their coefficients can be obtained from
electromyography.
Another great example: http://www.exrx.net/Kinesiology/Squats.html

Quote:
Torque Force

Barbell Squat

Contrary to propaganda, prominent weight training authorities demonstrate the squat with the knees flexing forward at the same distance as the hips flex backwards. Fredrick Hatfield, Ph.D., the first man to squat over 800 lbs, recommends the knees to extend over the feet with the back more upright for quadriceps development. "Strength Training for Young Athletes" by Steven J. Fleck, PhD and William J. Kraemer, PhD, illustrate parallel squats with the knees extending beyond the feet (knees moving forward with same magnitude as the hips moving backwards).

Torque force is necessary for the muscles and joint structures to adapt to the respected overload. If the knee does not travel forward during the barbell squat, the quadriceps muscles are not significantly exercised. On the other hand, injury may result if the knee or lower back experience greater torque forces than to what they are accustomed.

Fry et. al. (2003) examined the hip and knee torque forces of variations of parallel barbels squats and concluded appropriate joint loading during this exercise may require the knees to move slightly past the toes.

Try this simplified qualitative method in determining relative torque forces in the knee and hip joints. First take a photograph of the barbell squat in a full descent with a perspective perpendicular to the joints plane. Draw a line of force through the resistance on its center of gravity, straight up and down, parallel to the force of gravity. Gravity acting on both the body mass and added mass (barbell) contribute to the resistance. On the barbell squat, the center of gravity is between the forefoot and heel. If it is not, the individual will fall over, toward the center of gravity. Incidentally, compression forces act upon the joints during the squat stance.

Powerlifitng-style Squat

During the execution of a barbell squat, the knees and the hips travel in opposite directions away from the foot, or away from the center of gravity. Draw a second line on the knee joint parallel to the line of force. Draw a third line on the hip joint parallel to the previous lines. A relative comparison can be made on the torque forces of the knee and hip. Typically the torque forces are similar for the knee and hip joints on the barbell squat; the knees travel forward the same magnitude as the hips travel backwards. Generally speaking, during a powerlift type squat (bar lower behind the shoulders and a wider stance) the knee does not travel forward as far as a bodybuilding type squat. The hips typically travel back further with the torso bent forward on a powerlift type squat. This emphasizes the stronger hip extensors and adductors and consequently reduces knee extensor involvement. Knee torque is further reduced by a wide stance.
The info is out there, I read it often.
George Mounce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2009, 02:04 AM   #9
Timothy Holmes
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 221
Default

*penny drops*

Steven, that sums it up very nicely. For now on, that will be exactly how I think of conditioning. It was interesting to see my 400m times at club meets (usually the last event for the day) over the course of the season get worse as my conditioning decreased.

From this article:
develop work capacity (my focus for 6 months)
train speed/strength
train speed endurance
use event specific speed endurance runs (in season)

-----
"One thing I really realized had been discarded from the definition of "work capacity" (which is only measured in vertical displacement) is TORQUE." I wonder if the original use of "work capacity" was actually so literal... I suspect not.
__________________
dec log, goals: states '10 - 5600; states '11 - 6400
Timothy Holmes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2009, 11:39 AM   #10
Brian Stone
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Norwich, CT
Posts: 502
Default

I think that some of the points made herein excellently reinforce what I feel is an over-simplicity in the typical CF et al. model of work capacity. It'd be an easier sell to use the P=F*d/t equation in a vacuum, but using it to make strict data assessments is tricky IMV.

For example, this model claims that moving the same load over the same distance in less time is a strictly and measurably more powerful movement. This is going to be true to an extent, but I don't feel it will be as linear as the F2*d2/t2 - F1*d1/t1 would imply. Consider an athlete doing a 400 pound deadlift in a very slow, controlled, 5 second gradual lift vs. that same athlete deadlifting that same load in a tenth that time. It seems to me that calling the latter movement 10 times more powerful discounts the differing groups that will be recruited in each effort as well as the vastly increased isometric stresses demanded by the slower movement. All of these things require work and use energy. The same thing I think can be brought into the great pullup debate.

I'd be interested in any feedback. I'm not 100% sold on this but have just been bouncing it around when reading and viewing some of the scientific analyses I've seen and the underlying assumptions of those analyses.
Brian Stone is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:52 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Subscribe to our Newsletter


Receive emails with training tips, news updates, events info, sale notifications and more.
ASK GREG

Submit your question to be answered by Greg Everett in the Performance Menu or on the website

Submit Your Question
WEIGHTLIFTING TEAM

Catalyst Athletics is a USA Weightlifting team of competitive Olympic-style weightlifters with multiple national team medals.

Read More
Olympic Weightlifting Book
Catalyst Athletics
Contact Us
About
Help
Newsletter
Products & Services
Gym
Store
Seminars
Weightlifting Team
Performance Menu
Magazine Home
Subscriber Login
Issues
Articles
Workouts
About the Program
Workout Archives
Exercise Demos
Text Only
Instructional Content
Exercise Demos
Video Gallery
Free Articles
Free Recipes
Resources
Recommended Books & DVDs
Olympic Weightlifting Guide
Discussion Forum
Weight Conversion Calculator