Considering Autoregulation for Your Program

There is currently much discussion concerning the implications of the term “auto-regulatory.” It is a very intelligent sounding term. In more simple terms it may be referred to as “get your reps”. This might also be an over simplification since it might more specifically refer to “get your reps fast” on some other given day. Generally speaking though, we always want to move weight with the intent to be fast, whatever the intensity level.

Our choices in the auto-regulatory realm are rate of perceived exertion, reps in reserve and velocity based training. Velocity based training is known as ‘VBT”. This method uses a method known as linear position transduction. Popular devices are the Tendo and Gymaware. Feedback is provided in two forms. The first is bar speed in average meters per second. The second is feedback in wattage produced which is velocity combined with the amount of weight being moved. Gymaware provides a continuum of ranges of bar speed which matches up with a terminology of objectives. These ranges of speed also closely relate to the percentage of the one repetition maximum being moved. I personally used Tendos with many athletes for fifteen years. One scenario where I thought they were particularly effective was with using 1.2 meters per second as a standard for a block clean on an alternative day to improve the second pull. I also liked to use them to calculate peak power with the power clean because you must use control off of the floor therefore ave power would be in error.

Taking a look at the standards one might use as a guideline, Strength would be equated with <0.75m/s, Power with 0.75-1.3m/s and Speed is 0.75-1.0. More specifically Absolute Strength is <.5m/s, Accelerative Strength is 0.5-0.75m/s, Strength Speed is 0.75-1.0 and Speed Strength is 1.0-1.3m/s. If we are thinking in terms of one repetition maximums (which has been the process for many decades) then we are looking at Absolute Strength being above 80 percent, Accelerative Strength being between 60 and 80 percent, Strength Speed being between 40-60 percent, Speed Strength between 20-40 percent and starting strength less than 20 percent. What we used to refer to as light, medium and heavy days can now be more precisely considered as such. Bar speed dictates the prescribed weight for each set. The components of power are force and velocity and the velocity component has progressively evolved its way into a more defined set of objectives in the power rack. Where running speed development is concerned, acceleration training, absolute speed work and multi jumps have now been joined by VBT as a form of advancing the neuromuscular system.

We know that sprinting provides more tension to the muscle and connective tissue than any other form of training and multi jumps provide reactive work involving stretch reflex qualities. Knowing the importance of both force and velocity influences coaches to discover heightened methods of determining what an athlete needs relative to each quality. Here is where a coach must decide on an application to a general population. If you have a higher number of fast twitch athletes coming through the door with speed and jumping ability as freshmen despite a low number of training years, the answer may be a higher level of developing force to compliment the gifted qualities.

What did we do for several decades before auto-regulatory was born? I was personally never a coach who coached “forced reps”. I always required athletes to complete the reps in prescribed sets without assistance. The primary objective was to not predict a percentage too heavy and stay with a productive range specific to the goal for the day. I believe that good coaches did not attempt to be overzealous in promoting intensity that was unachievable. You would know that the result would be premature peaking or hinderance toward proper recovery through a training phase. The coach was required to be familiar with every athlete and the staff was required to closely monitor sets to insure that reps were successfully achieved with proper technique. Adjustments were reviewed at the end of the day.

The approach was taken to advance the neuromuscular system through absolute speed work, multi-jumps, olympic lifts and olympic lift variations. Static rack type movements where under the classifications of heavy, medium or light as major components of a three day or four day split type of program. I always felt that many collegiate athletes were under developed with regard to lower body strength so I preferred to not drop below 73 percent on any given day relative to those lifts. Such factors as technique, intensity, range of movement and rest intervals were never left to chance. Expecting an athlete to provide feedback from 1 to 10 or guess at how many reps they have in reserve does not particularly impress me as a more productive method than the traditional means of intensive and attentive coaching. I'm not completely convinced that the accuracy and frequency of a well delivered testing process should be thrown to the wind because it is based off of one repetition maximums or extrapolated numbers. The error is corrected through the quality of the coach and the attention to the athlete.

Through over thirty years of coaching I found that linear periodization combined with cluster sets and VBT to be very effective in progressing the power clean. VBT was always from blocks on the alternative day of a four day split as previously mentioned. I had three athletes power clean over 400, eight over 374 and several dozen over 352. I found success in developing strength with the static lifts with 3 week mini cycles, max effort schemes, wave progressions, Bulgarian cycles and finally what I refer to as level fives. It was much easier to facilitate longer training cycles before discretionary weeks were enacted. A 12 week cycle at the collegiate level is near impossible.

The level five concept is very simple. Achieve five reps successfully on each work set. We are working for maximum tonnage relatively “level” following the warm up. The method was used with bench press, bench press variations and leg press on an absolute strength day. Warm up is 64%x3, 70%x2 and 76%x1. This is followed by four work sets of five reps. Total tonnage is calculated. If every set , for example, was executed successfully with 300 pounds the total would be 6000, Standards were established relative to ranges of body weight. The relationship with the concept of auto- regulation is that this is the more primitive motivation of achieving of all reps within our work sets. If you miss a rep in a work set your total is deducted that amount. If the spotter touches the bar the rep is cancelled. If yo were using 300 pounds and only achieved three reps your total would be deducted 600 pounds. If you were just able to add five pounds to each set you gained 100 pounds toward total tonnage. You are motivated to use achievable weight. On a day where you are feeling strong in the first set you might kick it up slightly. There is always the motivation to get stronger but not lose a rep. This method is actually auto-regulated if you follow the rules.

Lets review VBT. Distinct advantages. Identification of proper training loads when the fluctuations in muscle performance occur as a result of life stressors. Helps identify optimal velocities and specific loads. Provides immediate feedback.

We can all agree here. Is it affordable? If not, other solutions already established may apply.