Chris Thibaudeau wrote:
>
> The autoregulation concept which is closely linked the cybernetic
> periodization and which refers to the actual self-adjustment of the
> training load according to the daily capacity of the athlete. I first
> learned this concept from one of Dr. Siff's article in the Soviet
> Sports Review (1993) on APRE Training and from the work of Dr.
> Ladislav Pataki.
>
> The article by Dr. Siff and the book by Dr. Pataki detailed 2
> different method of adjusting your training load to your capacity for
> that day.
>
> Dr. Siff's method consisted of training using a fixed number of reps
> during a specific workout and increasing intensity until one hit the
> maximum load he could use for the prescribed number of reps.
>
> For example, if the prescribed number of reps was 6, one could have
> the following progression during his training session:
>
> Set no.0: Warm-up
> Set no.1: 6 reps with 50% of his 6RM
> Set no.2: 6 reps with 75% of his 6RM
> Set no.3: 6 reps with 100% of his 6RM*
>
> * If the third set is successful:
>
> Set no.4: 6 reps with an additional 5lbs**
>
> **If the fourth set is successful:
>
> Set no.5: 6 reps with an additional 5lbs
>
> And this goes on until one is unable to complete the prescribed 6
> reps ... the last load achieved then become the new 6RM which is used
> as the basis for the planification of the load to use for the next
> session.
>
> Dr. Pataki's method is slightly different. The load is constant (and
> must be challenging for the prescribed number of reps) throughout the
> training session and so is the number of reps per set and the rest
> between sets. The athlete do as much sets as he can until he cannot
> complete the number of reps prescribed.
>
> For example, if the prescribed number of reps was 6:
>
> Set no.0: warm-up
> Set no.1: 6 reps with 95% of 6RM (completed)
> Set no.2: 6 reps with 95% of 6RM (completed)
> Set no.3: 6 reps with 95% of 6RM (completed)
> Set no.4: 6 reps with 95% of 6RM (completed)
> Set no.5: 6 reps with 95% of 6RM (only 5 reps completed)
>
> If the athlete is able to sustain a lot of work the load must be
> increased in the next session or the rest between sets is decreased.
>
> To these 2 methods one could add the classic bulgarian wave loading
> method where you gradually work up to your maximum capacity for a
> given workout, reduce the load and do more sets, then go back up.
>
> Example:
>
> Set no.0: warm-up
> Set no.1: 3 reps with 60% of 1RM
> Set no.2: 3 reps with 70% of 1RM
> Set no.3: 3 reps with 80% of 1RM
> Set no.4: 2 reps with 90% of 1RM
> Set no.5: 1 rep with 95% of 1RM*
>
> * If successful:
>
> Set no.6: 1 rep with an additional 5-10kg*
>
> * If successful:
>
> Set no.7: 1 rep with an additional 5-10kg*
> Set no.8: 2 reps with 90% of 1RM
> Set no.9: 2 reps with 95% of 1RM
> Set no.10: 1 rep with daily max
>
> ***Of course this is not a real Bulgarian loading pattern, just an
> example.
>
> Still, one could add the 3-2-1 wave loading method of Canadian
> weightlifting coach Pierre Roy where one does sets in wave pattern
> ... each wave comprising 3 sets of increasing intensity. When one is
> able to complete a wave, he starts a new one with the same reps
> scheme but with increased loading.
>
> Example:
>
> Set no.0: warm-up
> Set no.1: 3 reps with 88% of 1RM
> Set no.2: 2 reps with 92% of 1RM
> Set no.3: 1 rep with 98% of 1RM
>
> If all 3 sets are successful:
>
> Set no.4: 3 reps with 90% of 1RM
> Set no.5: 2 reps with 94% of 1RM
> Set no.6: 1 rep with 100% of 1RM
>
> If all 3 sets are successful:
>
> Set no.7: 3 reps with 92% of 1RM
> Set no.8: 2 reps with 96% of 1RM
> Set no.9: 1 rep with 102% of 1RM
>
> If all 3 sets are successful:
>
> Set no.10: 3 reps with 94% of 1RM
> Set no.11: 2 reps with 98% of 1RM
> Set no.12: 1 rep with 104% of 1RM
>
> Regardless of what scheme you use, the thing I like with this type of
> training is that it"s highly adjustable to the ever-changing
> capacities of the athlete. Some days the athlete has not fully
> restored his glycogen or protein structures so he will not be able to
> do as much work ... having him stick to a set loading parameters in
> that case can be overkill and further delay the supercompensation
> process and vice-versa.
>
> IMHO, autoregulating training methods are much more adequate to
> develop high performance athletes than set-in-stone loading schemes
> (even one carefully planned taking all physiological aspects in
> consideration).
>
> References:
>
> Pataki, L., "Autoregulation of Training Load" in Zbornik VR UV CSZTV,
> Bratislava, 1983, pp 233-236.
>
> Pataki, L., Holden, L., "Winning Secrets" (sorry, I don't have the
> full ref. I borrowed the book from a friend).
>
> Siff MC & Verkhoshansky YV "Supertraining" 1999 Ch 6
>
