This month of content features a mini-masterclass that covers 3 auto-regulation strategies for speed training. Sticking with the auto-regulation theme, I wanted to cover this topic as it relates to strength training as well.
Cue Google Scholar…and here we are!
With the rise of velocity-based training as well as the classic rate of perceived exertion scale, there are a plenty of strategies available to the Performance Coach. I wanted to pull a study- specifically a review- that looked at a large population of testing styles and compared it to the traditional ‘fixed loading’ strategies that are also popular. I hope you enjoy this review and learn something new about auto-regulation!
If you’re new here, here’s how these research reviews break down…
Part 1: What we know.
This is going to explain what the research was looking to study, how they studied it, and why you should care.
Part 2: Any comments or concerns about what the study is showing?
Sometimes the best research study looks so good on paper, but then when you dive in you see that it was done on olympic athletes, or was sponsored by a specific company, or something else that can throw a major red flag on its effectiveness in practical use. Alas, that is what we are for here at Parisi HQ
Part 3: How can I use this?
This part is going to explain practical applications of the research. Typically research is lab based and can be hard to replicate when you’re a Performance Coach on a budget. I’m going to do my best to break down how you can actually apply this research to you coaching
Here’s the article of note, in citation format for you grammar nerds out there…it’s hyperlinked to the text in case you want to dive in yourself.
Part 1: What we know.
Though the title of this segment is ‘Research Review’, this covers a full on study review. The authors searched far and wide, okay, maybe just a few of the big name research platforms – Pubmed, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science, Embase, EBSCO, Cochrane, CNKI, and CQVIP databases- and found eight related studies published between 2010 and 2020, with a total of 166 subjects including division 1 college players and athletes with at least 1-year training history, and training programs that ranged from 5 to 10 weeks.
A meta-analysis was performed to check the difference between the two training methods, auto-regulation and fixed loading,, and analyzed the differences in the existing auto-regulation programs’ effectiveness.
The punchline here, and this may surprise you, the overall results showed that the auto-regulation method was more effective than the fixed-loading method in maximum strength training
In specific, the combined results from all the various subgroups indicated that the auto-regulation method may effectively improve the strength performance in squat and bench press.
Why those lifts specifically? Easy to test, ease of equipment, and at the D1 collegiate level, 95% of athletes are performing those two movements…
What was most surprising from this meta analysis was that benefits of the auto-regulation method on strength improvement could be achieved in an 8-week or even shorter training periods, especially when compared to longer 10 week training blocks.
In case you wanted the spoiler- the authors cite a 5-7 week training block using auto-regulation can yield results…
Keep reading, but part 3 will highlight a strategy on how to implement this in to your training.
Part 2: Any comments or concerns about what the study is showing?
The nice thing about reading meta-reviews, is that they have the ability to use hindsight…specifically, they can dissect the 8 studies reviewed and pull out the data they like (and data that matches their thesis) and can minimize the conflicts.
The only thing I wish- but understand that they can’t do it very easily- is test a variety of movements and implements…real world, that is near impossible…but a Performance Coach can dream, right?
Part 3: How can I use this?
Don’t get me wrong…I love percentage based loading and often use it with my athletes as ‘targets’ for their training. However, this review highlighted that maximum strength can fluctuate daily by 10-20% depending on many different factors (neurological, physiological, etc.).
When looking at auto-regulation strategies for Performance Coaches, there are three main strategies you can implement….
1) The Autoregulatory Progressive Resistance Exercise (APRE) is a program regulated based on the completed reps. The APRE program requires athletes to determine the training weight of the first and the second sets in advance, and further adjust the training weight of the fourth set according to the completed reps of the third set. If the third set’s completed reps are more than the target reps, the weight will be increased. Otherwise, the weight will be reduced.
2) The Rating of Perceived Exertion program (RPE) is regulated using various RPE measuring scales. Among the scales, the Borg Scale and the OMNI-RES Scale are popular tools for Performance Coaches, and were used frequently across the meta-review. For the two scales, a higher score indicates more difficulty in finishing one rep. For example, the RPE 9 means a hard attempt but still one more rep can be done, and the RPE10 means extremely hard and another rep is impossible or the athlete is at failure.
3) The Velocity-Based Training (VBT) is a program regulated based on the movement speed during the training. This training program highly relies on the speed detector or wearable devices that are usually employed in the strength training to monitor athletes’ movement and provide feedback to regulate the working load. For example, a speed below 0.5 m/s is considered effective to develop maximum strength, during the training, if the movement speed exceeds the speed range, the load will be increased; otherwise, the load will be reduced or the training will be terminated. This is a great (and accurate) way to auto-regulate an athlete or team in a weight room, however the cost can be a limiting factor for many.