Getting the most out of your exercise selection
Progressions of exercises
Coaching at a high level is a blend of art and science. There are certain things we know to be true, scientific principles that govern choices made by coaches to garner the best adaptations for their athletes. There are some things, on the other hand, that require an experienced eye and careful consideration, such as building motivation, buy-in, and some aspects of programming as well.
I believe exercise selection to be one of the facets of a strength coaches’ job that falls under both categories. As much as possible, I try to let science and tested research guide my decision making and shape how athlete’s programs will look.
At the end of the day, each athlete is different, and it is up to me to decide backed by research as to how to train each individual with varying needs.
For example, most hypertrophy blocks will look like each other, but none will be exactly the same. Here is where I let science guide my decision making but utilize my own experience and skill as a coach to “fill in the gaps.”
One of the things I look at is how often does an athlete need to progress or regress an exercise? Most of us know intuitively that you cannot run the same exercise, sets, reps and intensity week after week and continue to see results. This is where exercise selection and progression come into play.
Why do we progress exercises?
Like I said above, you can’t squat every Monday week in and week out for 5 sets of 5 reps at 75% of your 1RM and continue to make progress. Eventually, your body will adapt to the stimulus as it thinks to itself “Oh, I’ve done this before, I know exactly how to do this.” This is where you hit a plateau.
This is known as the SAID principle, or Specific Adaptation to Imposed Demands. In human physiology, this simply means the body adapts to specific stress. Doing 5 sets of 5 at 75% repeatedly will make you better at doing 5 sets of 5 at 75%, not necessarily stronger in your 1rm. At some point, you must train maximal loads to gain absolute strength.
Therefore we progress exercises, volume, and intensity over time. It allows for the body to continue to adapt to new stress stimulus without becoming too accustomed to any specific stimulus and plateauing.
General vs. specific strength qualities
Another factor to consider in exercise progressions is the type of adaptation the coach is seeking. We know from recent research into velocity-based training by Dr. Bryan Mann, among many others, that there are specific “zones” of intensity that train specific strength qualities.
For instance, you can train absolute strength in the 90-100% 1rm ranges (see Dr. Bryan Mann’s work on velocity based training for different strength zones) but if you’re looking for speed-strength qualities, 30-40% loads work the best for this kind of adaptation.
As an off-season goes on, a coach might find it beneficial to progress from absolute strength work to speed-strength work as the primary focus, in order to take those newfound strength gains and translate them to power and explosion on the field. This would teach the athlete to utilize the new muscle mass and strength qualities quickly and, in a way that he or she would on the field.
To use an example to clearly demonstrate my point, let’s look at the overhead movement pattern:
I might start the off-season with alternating dumbbell overhead press, where the athlete has feet on the floor, and is working each side of his body individually. This can help to eliminate any imbalances and the lighter load nature of the dumbbells compared to a barbell allows for a chance for the athlete to recover from their competitive season.
Then, in the next block I would shift to a barbell overhead press. This allows the athlete to overload the movement compared to the dumbbells, leading to greater strength gains.
After that, it would shift to something like a barbell push press. While we can still progressively overload the athlete with this movement, it is faster in nature and generates power from the hips, which more closely resembles on-field activities, like a tackle.
Finally, a power jerk would be the last movement utilized in this hypothetical progression. It is the fastest variation of these movements, and places different demands on the athlete. Most notably, the athlete must use the overhead strength they’ve gained, as well as power they can generate in their legs and hips to drive the bar, change directions and stabilize, all done forcefully and quickly.
As you can see, all exercises are very different in loading and demands placed on the athlete. Each one is specifically placed in the program to optimize the training stimulus for this specific movement pattern.
In short, it depends on what you look to accomplish with your workout that determines exercise selection and loading.
So…how often should I progress exercises?
This is a short answer to a much larger question…basically it depends on your periodization scheme. If you utilize a block-type style of periodization, simply switching exercises each block can be enough to provide a novel stimulus and keep training effective.
Mike Tuchscherer of Reactive Training System pioneered a system where, essentially, you keep running the same “block” until the stimulus ceases to be effective, progressing the same exercises until progress is no longer seen, then you pivot to a new, novel stimulus.
To keep it simple, I tend to progress lifts and other “weight room” exercises every mesocycle, which typically for my athletes is every 4 weeks. I’ve never programmed the same exercise for more than 6 weeks in a row, and I’ve gone as low as a 2-week cycle.
For field work such as sprints and certain types of plyometric exercises, I progress athletes as they are able. To me, in most cases, it is pointless to hold an athlete back in a rudimentary jumping drill when they are clearly advanced enough to not receive the benefit from it. Simply sticking to exercises because they are “part of the program” is a disservice to your athletes.
The opposite holds true as well. If an athlete needs 3 weeks to master a cone drill I had planned to use for 2, I will make accommodations for that. These drills tend to show the most variability athlete-to-athlete, and as a coach it is my responsibility to make sure each athlete progresses in a way that helps them achieve their goals.
Adapting a program to fit your needs
This is a trap I fell into for a long, long time. And I believe with the prevalence of online coaching templates, is one athletes are more prone to fall into than ever before. The program should be adaptable to YOU. Coaches should provide progressions and regressions that make the program work best for your individual abilities, not the other way around.
One of the most amazing revelations of my young coaching career was that…shockingly, I could change a program!
If I laid out a perfectly periodized and progressed 4 week program ahead of time, and then by week 2 day 2 was burnt out, I would stubbornly keep plugging away because that “was the program.” I’d fail a set, get frustrated, and scrap the whole thing.
Instead, I’ve learned to listen to my body. If I have heavy squats programmed for the day but barely slept last night, I’ll lessen the load and get quality work in, and pick back up with regularly scheduled programming the next day. It’s been such a simple, but amazing discovery and I’d encourage you to do the same.
This is also why, even though I provide online coaching and program templates, I’m a huge advocate for in-person coaching. Nothing online replaces a coach’s eye and the ability to alter a program on the fly to garner the best adaptation for an athlete on that given day.