Precision in Progression

Physical training is an exercise in navigation - a movement from “here,” to “there.”

For some, “there” may be a 500lb back squat; for others, it may be a sub-3 hour marathon, or bigger biceps, or a greater degree of self-confidence. The outcome is relative and subjective; the process to get there, however, is far less so.

Genuine, progressive change demands effort and friction - stress. It demands the old clashing with the new, the familiar meeting the uncertain. Insufficient inputs yield little effect, perhaps even stagnation or backsliding; conversely, generous application of stress may result in injury, or insult, or both.

I’m describing some flavor of General Adaptation Syndrome, a near-century-old theory posited by Hans Selye - it suggests that stress exposure can result in a net gain, loss, or no-change of condition, depending on the magnitude/duration of the stimulus and the readiness of the individual.

It’s effectively a Goldilocks problem. Too little stress, or stimulus, doesn’t change the system involved. Too much may result in varying degrees of injury, discontent, or catastrophe. Of course, the “just right” amount of stress results in some degree of further adaptation, following a period of temporarily diminished readiness.

This theory, along with others such as the SAID Principle, is an elementary concept of human performance. Stress is required to evolve, without a doubt. But, how often, of what type, of what quantity, and of what quality - these questions muddy the waters.

Training, in the long run, is not a simple Point A to Point B trek. It’s a series of interconnected movements, chained together across sessions and time. Poor route planning may land you in a swamp, despite appearing as forward movement - whether marathoning or bodybuilding. Intelligent stress application is critical to progress toward the defined destination.

Questions of stress application can be largely addressed through the lenses of specificity, quantity, quality, and frequency. I’ll quit the allegorical musing and cut to the chase:

Specificity:

This is largely self-explanatory, although often disregarded by coaches and athletes, alike.

Does the thing you’re doing actually facilitate the outcome that you idealize?

The best way to improve at running, most likely, is… running.

Quantity:

In the weight room, I usually consider “quantity” through the lens of volume - sets and reps. Tracking volume across training sessions can provide an objective metric of the “quantity” aspect of resistance training; you can track tonnage, of course, as a composite of quantity and intensity.

For endurance work, I often measure quantity in terms of distance, time, or calories, most frequently.

How far did you go, for how long did you go, and/or how many calories did you expend?

Quality:

What is the nature of the stress applied?

Quality is observed by all kinds of methods, ranging from RPE scales, to weight on the bar, to heart rate, to pace, to movement pattern, to bar speed, to teeth gritting, to displacement, to innumerable other objective or entirely subjective measures.

I extend quality beyond “intensity” alone. High-intensity efforts can have a poor qualitative effect for the stated outcome - i.e. doing exclusively VO2 intervals to develop “endurance.” Is it intense? Sure. Does the stimulus lack major qualitative components necessary for development of genuine aerobic capacity? Also, yes. 

Frequency:

How often is the stress applied?

Does the athlete clean and jerk every day or every week?

Frequency of stress application is a critical variable; it’s a major reason why I don’t necessarily extol the value of a high-variability program. 

"I fear not the man who has practiced 10,000 kicks once, but I fear the man who has practiced one kick 10,000 times.” - Bruce Lee

In essence, the long-run movement of an individual from Point A to Point B is facilitated by short-term training and lifestyle decisions; it’s not a straight line, it’s a constellation.

Intelligent, discretionary application of stress allows for efficiency of navigation.

Specificity / Quantity / Quality / Frequency

Onward.