Non-linear periodization is a topic I have covered many of times in past blog articles.  I have looked at research and given some practical applications of how to use this sort of periodization structure.  Just to review, linear periodization begins with low-intensity/high volume lifting and progresses to high-intensity/low volume lifting over the course of many weeks.  For example:

• Week 1-3: 3×10
• Week 4-6: 3×8
• Week 8-10: 4×5
• Week 11-12: 6×3

While non-linear periodization allows for weekly or daily fluctuations of training volume and intensity.

A weekly non-linear periodization example:

• Week 1-2: 3×10
• Week 3-4: 4×5
• Week 6-8: 3×8
• Week 9-10: 6×3

A daily non-linear periodization model example:

• Day 1: 4×4
• Day 2: 3×8
• Day 3: 3×10

Flexible Non-Linear Periodization

A recent study published in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research actually looked at the concept of flexible non-linear periodization.

What this basically means is that you have the freedom to alter the workout based on how the athlete (or yourself) is feeling on any given day.  There are various ways to determine when to change the workout, and I will address some of these below.  But in a nutshell, this concept allows you to take into consideration the individual and make the program more specific to them.

Training programs are really nothing more than a shell or outline of what needs to take place.  The program should, however, be plastic and allow for changes depending on the individuals progress (progressing quicker or slower than expected), competition schedule (a competition may come up in the middle of a training cycle, or the athlete may decide to jump into a competition at the last second that was not on their original competition schedule), or based on how the athlete feels (tired, beat down, getting over being sick, etc.).

The study conducted by McNamara and Stearne sought out to determine the effectiveness of flexible non-linear periodization when compared to regular non-linear periodization.

The subjects were placed into two training groups for the entire 16-week cycle:

• A non-linear periodization group who alternated workouts between 10-reps per set, 15-reps per set and 20-reps per set.
• A flexible non-linear periodization group who used the same repetition numbers; however, this group was allowed to pick between which repetition number they performed for a given workout.  This choice was based on the subjects rating their energy levels (a scale of 0 to 10, which 0 being “no energy” and 10 being “extremely motivated and full of energy”).  In order to ensure that the subjects in both groups performed the same total volume for the entire study, the subjects in this group were allowed to choose their rep number, however they had to choose one of the other two rep numbers in the next workout, so that one rep number was not prioritized over another.  Because of this, towards the end of each 4-week mesocycle, it was possible that the subjects were not given a choice of which rep range to choose, in order to keep total volume between groups similar.

The subjects trained twice a week for 30min. each session.

Pre and post tests consisted of leg press, chest press and standing long jump.

Results

The flexible non-linear periodization group improved significantly in the leg press, while changes in the standing long jump and chest press were not significant between the two groups.

The researchers stated that the superior improvements in leg press by the flexible non-linear group may be attributed to the subjects having the ability to choose between rep numbers for each workout, allowing them greater recovery between sessions, and thus greater improvements in strength.

The insignificant improvements in long jump may be attributed to the fact that the subjects performed no power training during the 16-week training program, and the training program in this study consisted of repetitions that were low in velocity.  Thus there was no stimulus to adequately improve this quality.  The lack of significant difference between the two groups in the chest press may be due to the fact that the upper body received more overall training volume, a greater number of exercises, than the lower body, leading the researchers to believe that the upper body may have been overtrained.

The researchers concluded that, “A flexible non-linear periodization program may be a highly effective method of training for improving leg strength.  Coaches can immediately implement a flexible non-linear program by evaluating the readiness of an athlete immediately before his or her training session, then adjusting the assigned exercise intensity accordingly.”

My thoughts on using this practically

While a flexible approach to periodization is certainly nothing new, this is the first study (that I am aware 0f) that actually looked at the difference between a non-linear and a flexible non-linear training program.

In Supertraining, Mel Siff, actually talks about the concept of cybernetic periodization, which he discusses in regards to the training of the Bulgarian Weightlifting Team.  Basically, instead of being stuck in a very rigid periodization program, where you are forced to stay true to whatever lifting percentage is prescribed for the day, Mel advocates adjusting the daily lifting percentage based on subjective and objective feedback obtained by the lifters performance.  From there, the lifter trains on a rate of precieved exertion.  If things feel heavy that day or the athlete does not feel strong, then the training load is lighter, and vice versa.

This concept is not a bad idea, as it allows you to ensure that the athlete is fully recovered before performing high quality work.  The 0 to 10 scale in the study should not be the only way to obtain information on the athlete.  Obviously lazy athletes or athletes who like to go out and party and drink at night, will constantly be reporting low numbers so that they can slide by with easier workouts (but, you should really talk to the athletes about their all nighters and party habits, as this can be a real problem with their preparation).  On the flip side of that, highly motivated athletes that never want to give in to having a light workout will always report high numbers so that they can always train harder.

In Optimizing Strength Training: Designing Nonlinear Periodization Workouts Kraemer and Fleck advocate testing the athlete with a power exercise – like a vertical jump – to determine if the athlete is prepared for intense training (either power or intense strength work) that day.  If the power exercise is near their normal pre-training numbers (within 10%) then they are cleared to go, if it is outside of that 10%, then you need to divert to a less intense, more recovery focused workout.

Obviously other tests could be performed in a addition to or instead of the power exercise, to gain more feedback on the athlete.  Some coaches may use things like blood pressure, resting/waking heart rate, and others have talked about using Heart-Rate Variability as measures of an athlete’s preparedness to train.

One of the issues with the study above is that it was conducted on subjects who were new to resistance training, so it is difficult to tell whether or not this type of flexibility will be successful in elite athletes.

Conclusions

It appears that flexible non-linear periodization may be helpful in the preparation of athletes, as it allows for individual variability in recovery from training and competition.  No two athletes are alike, and one may have better recovery from a training program than another.  Because of this, coaches need to monitor their athletes to ensure that they are getting the most out of their training program and recovering adequately, to prevent overtraining and decreased performance.

References

McNamara JM, Stearne DJ. Flexible Nonlinear Periodization In A Begginer College Weight Training Class. J Strength Cond Res2010;24(1):17-22.

Siff M. Supertraining. Supertraining Institute; 6th ed. 2003. pgs. 326-327.

Kraemer WJ, Fleck SJ. Optimizing Strength Training: Designing Nonlinear Periodization Workouts. Human Kinetics. 2007.

The popular debate that surfaced this past year was between the role of exercise in fat loss.

It basically started with Time Magazine running an article titled Why Exercise Wont Make You Thin.

Right when the article came out, it began an internet firestorm from health professionals blogging about how horrible Time Magazine was for publishing this article – talk about going viral!

I read the article a few days after it came out and to tell you the truth, it wasn’t that bad!  In reality, all it was saying was what we basically already know, “you can’t out work a poor diet.”

I am not going to dispute that diet is an important component to losing fat.  In fact, it is the most important component as far as I am concerned.  We have all seen those people in the gym who kill themselves 2 hours a day/7 days a week, yet see minimal to no results because they are constantly over-eating.

While diet is important for losing fat, exercise is essential for achieving higher levels of health.  Together, an appropriate calorie-restricted diet and a sound exercise program are essential not only for improving body composition, but also improving the overall function of the body’s systems.

Researchers at the Pennigton Biomedical Research Center at Louisiana State University recently evaluated the results of caloric restriction with or without exercise.

Thirty-six overweight participants (16 males/20 females) were randomly assigned to one of three groups for the 6-month study:

1. A control group who ate a weight-maintenance healthy diet
2. A caloric restriction group who restricted energy intake by eating at a daily caloric deficit of 25%
3. A caloric restriction plus exercise group who created a daily caloric deficit of 25% by reducing energy intake by 12.5% and increasing energy expenditure by 12.5%

The researchers posed the following question:

“Does caloric restriction with or without exercise result in different improvements in cardiometabolic risk factors which could ultimately improve longevity?  The purpose of this analysis was to determine whether a deficit by energy restriction or energy restriction plus aerobic exercise that produces equal change in fatness leads to greater cardiometabolic benefits when exercise is included.”

The Diet

The diets used in the study where based on the America Heart Association’s Step 1 recommendations.

During the first 12 weeks of the study food was provided for all groups based on their dietary needs.  In weeks 13-22 the subjects self-selected their own diet based on their individual caloric target, and in weeks 22-24 (the final two weeks of the study) the subjects returned to the in-feeding protocol, which they used in the fist 12 weeks.

The Exercise

Both the control group and the caloric restriction only group where not allowed to alter their current level of physical activity for the 6-month study.

The caloric restriction plus exercise group was required to increase their energy expenditure by 12.5% above their baseline requirements.  They did so by partaking in a structured aerobic exercise program (IE, walking, running or stationary cycling) for 5 days a week.

Adherence

Adherence is a common problem in studies like this, and subjects are notorious for under-reporting their caloric intake and over-reporting their caloric-expenditure.

The subjects in this study attended weekly group meetings and were contacted once per week via telephone to ensure there were no adherence problems to the program.

Tests

The subjects were tested for changes in fat mass, visceral fat, Vo2 peak (using a graded treadmill test), muscular strength (isokinetic knee extension/flexion), blood lipids, blood pressure, and insulin sensitivity/secretion.

Aerobic Fitness and Muscle Strength Results

The exercise group was the only group that saw improvements in Vo2 peak, which is to be expected since they were the only group stressing their aerobic fitness.

There were no changes in muscle strength between the groups.  This would be expected considering this study did not have a resistance training component to it.

Body Composition Results

Body fat was significantly reduced in both the caloric restriction and caloric restriction plus exercise groups, as were total body fat mass and visceral abdominal fat.

People may look at those results and think that those results aren’t very promising for the exercise group; however, I look at those results and see what I would expect to see given that both groups had created an equal caloric deficit (25%).

Cardiometabolic Risk Factors

This is where, in my opinion, things get important.

HDL (the “good” cholesterol) was significantly increased in all treatment groups, including the control group. This is possibly because their diet was set up for them based on the American Heart Association guidelines. And even though they were not eating in a caloric deficit – rather eating at a weight-maintenance level – the diet was probably healthier than the normal junk they would eat on a daily basis.

Fasting serum triglyceride concentration increased significantly in the control group, but decreased significantly in both the caloric restriction and the caloric restriction plus exercise groups.

While systolic blood pressure was not changed in any of the groups, diastolic blood pressure, total cholesterol, LDL (the “bad” cholesterol), and insulin sensitivity were significantly improved ONLY in the caloric restriction plus exercise group!

Summary

– Adding exercise to your calorie-restricted fat-loss diet has greater improvements on cardiometabolic health, which are greater than caloric restriction alone.

– The addition of aerobic exercise to a calorie-restricted diet enhances overall aerobic fitness which is helpful for improving health and wellness.

– Calorie restriction is essential for fat loss and body composition changes; however, when combined with exercise, the amount of caloric restriction needed to illicit the same results in body composition is decreased (12.5% caloric restriction with exercise intervention vs. 25% caloric restriction with no exercise).

– Aerobic exercise has been shown to improve insulin sensitivity, which is important in the health of overweight/obese individuals who may be at greater risk for diabetes and/or other metabolic disorders.

Conclusion

Calorie restriction is king when it comes to fat loss.  A proper diet will help you achieve this goal, but exercise can be effective in not only helping you reach this goal (without having to rely as heavily on reducing calories, which typically leads to a miserable experience and lack of adherence) but also, in helping improve your overall cardiovascular and metabolic health.

Reference

Larson-Meyer DE, Redman L, Heilbronn LK, Martin CK, Ravussin E.Caloric restriction with or without exercise: The fitness versus fatness debate. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2010;42(1):152-159.