Reply
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 67
  1. #31
    We know lol Farley1324's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2008
    Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
    Posts: 120,453
    Rep Power: 451766
    Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000)
    Farley1324 is offline
    Originally Posted by sooby View Post
    I didn't say that anybody said that in the thread, i'm just pointing out the pervasive myths that are out there when it comes to CNS fatigue. Not to mention somebody mentioned something about squatting 500 lbs 4 times a week as opposed to 1 week so close enough, short-term was the point there. CNS recovers really quickly often within the the workout itself.
    I do believe there is a substantial difference between doing something 1x per week and doing it 4x per week
    Controlled Labs Rep
    nathan @ controlledlabs.com
    Reply With Quote

  2. #32
    Registered User WolfRose7's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2016
    Location: United Kingdom (Great Britain)
    Age: 26
    Posts: 8,986
    Rep Power: 44145
    WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    WolfRose7 is online now
    Originally Posted by Farley1324 View Post
    Big experience guys such as Louise Simmons say otherwise.

    But then I suppose it might be a matter of semantics at this point.
    Semantics/out-dated info

    Louise is awesome, was never exactly a anatomist though
    Entirely plausible he would end up doing the right things, for the wrong reason, or at least wrongly attributed reason
    2018 Log
    https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=175232661

    FMH Crew, Sandbagging Mike Tuscherer Wannabee
    Reply With Quote

  3. #33
    Banned sooby's Avatar
    Join Date: Feb 2015
    Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts: 18,964
    Rep Power: 0
    sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    sooby is offline
    Originally Posted by Farley1324 View Post
    I do believe there is a substantial difference between doing something 1x per week and doing it 4x per week
    of course there is, it's just called peripheral or muscular fatigue and not the CNS fatigue that everybody likes to cry about when they have a bad session. it's semantics to a point except when people think that the major cause of it is heavy weights and compound exercises, that's all
    Reply With Quote

  4. #34
    Banned maddog352002's Avatar
    Join Date: Apr 2018
    Posts: 1,230
    Rep Power: 0
    maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000) maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000) maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000) maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000) maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000) maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000) maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000) maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000) maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000) maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000) maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000)
    maddog352002 is offline
    How is CNS fatigue Quantified. Is there a physical measurement for it. Peripheral fatigue can be measured with cortisol levels when Baseline by each individual person. I don't know if they're is a equivocal measurement for CNS. If there is no measurement for it how do we know it exists?
    Reply With Quote

  5. #35
    22-3 Orlando1234977's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2006
    Location: Wisconsin, United States
    Posts: 13,133
    Rep Power: 77664
    Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000)
    Orlando1234977 is offline
    Originally Posted by sooby View Post
    I didn't say that anybody said that in the thread, i'm just pointing out the pervasive myths that are out there when it comes to CNS fatigue. Not to mention somebody mentioned something about squatting 500 lbs 4 times a week as opposed to 1 week so close enough, short-term was the point there. CNS recovers really quickly often within the the workout itself.
    You must have missed the word cumulative.

    An no, peripheral fatigue recovers faster than nervous system fatigue other than perhaps novice. Pretty common sense when you're moving heavy weight. Every lifting goal manages it differently, but even in the context of powerlifters or anyone chasing 1rm, where are the examples of advanced lifters training as heavy as possible (intensity) as often as possible (frequency) without managing for cns fatigue?
    DR. 3time (until they quit, or it'd be DR. 6time)
    Did you really think you can attack Cobra Kai and there wouldn't be any consequences?
    They drew first blood not me
    Brewers, Bucks, Badgers, Packers
    ~Cobra Kai Crew~
    Reply With Quote

  6. #36
    Registered User WolfRose7's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2016
    Location: United Kingdom (Great Britain)
    Age: 26
    Posts: 8,986
    Rep Power: 44145
    WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    WolfRose7 is online now
    Originally Posted by maddog352002 View Post
    How is CNS fatigue Quantified. Is there a physical measurement for it. Peripheral fatigue can be measured with cortisol levels when Baseline by each individual person. I don't know if they're is a equivocal measurement for CNS. If there is no measurement for it how do we know it exists?
    Neuromuscular fatigue has central and peripheral origins. Central fatigue, preponderant during long-duration, low-intensity exercises, may involve a drop in the central command (motor, cortex, motoneurons) elicited by the activity of cerebral neurotransmitters and muscular afferent fibers
    There ya go, it's measurable
    2018 Log
    https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=175232661

    FMH Crew, Sandbagging Mike Tuscherer Wannabee
    Reply With Quote

  7. #37
    Banned sooby's Avatar
    Join Date: Feb 2015
    Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts: 18,964
    Rep Power: 0
    sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    sooby is offline
    Originally Posted by Orlando1234977 View Post
    You must have missed the word cumulative.

    An no, peripheral fatigue recovers faster than nervous system fatigue other than perhaps novice. Pretty common sense when you're moving heavy weight. Every lifting goal manages it differently, but even in the context of powerlifters or anyone chasing 1rm, where are the examples of advanced lifters training as heavy as possible (intensity) as often as possible (frequency) without managing for cns fatigue?
    you didn't specify the time frame of cumulative so I assumed you meant over the week.

    also did you read the article


    Literally had this entire section.

    "Myth 3: CNS fatigue takes longer to recover from than muscular fatigue
    You commonly hear the saying that while your muscles may be recovering in between workouts, your CNS may not. Over time this accumulation of fatigue could result in overtraining. Cool theory, but let’s see some data.



    Latella et al. (2016) studied the time-course of CNS recovery after strength training. They managed to induce a whopping 46% decrease in corticospinal excitability (measured by motor-evoked potential). This means major CNS fatigue. How many days do you think it took for the CNS to recover?



    It took 20 minutes for the CNS to recover. There was already no more significant loss of MEP after 10 minutes. Other research confirms that CNS fatigue is only evident directly post-workout even though muscle soreness and peripheral neuromuscular fatigue took over 3 days to recover from. This probably explains the lack of CNS fatigue in the elite athletes study we discussed earlier: Howatson et al. measured CNS fatigue 10 minutes post-workout. That may have already been too late. Interestingly, Latella et al. also found evidence that there was upregulation of the CNS rather than fatigue in the days after the workout: see the graph below. MEP = motor-evoked potential, which is roughly the strength of the signal sent by the motor cortex to the exercised muscle. A decrease suggests that the CNS can no longer fully activate the muscle, i.e. CNS fatigue."
    See bolded.

    what elite athletes are managing are muscular fatigue as well as a host of other factors. What you've mentioned as "common sense" is completely wrong.
    Reply With Quote

  8. #38
    We know lol Farley1324's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2008
    Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
    Posts: 120,453
    Rep Power: 451766
    Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000)
    Farley1324 is offline
    Originally Posted by sooby View Post
    of course there is, it's just called peripheral or muscular fatigue and not the CNS fatigue that everybody likes to cry about when they have a bad session. it's semantics to a point except when people think that the major cause of it is heavy weights and compound exercises, that's all
    Semantics, meaning that what the coaches and trainers (and athletes) observe has a different name than what they are giving it, that's one thing (suggestion that peripheral fatigue is being called CNS fatigue). But saying the coaches/etc are not even properly attributing what they observe or experience (by whatever name) to the correct cause...that I'm not buying based on an EMG study.

    Almost seems like the implication by the EMG study is that what people call overtraining is CNS fatigue and what people call CNS fatigue is peripheral fatigue...maybe...but I'm not about to toss the direct statements or implications and consistencies of guys like Wendler, Simmons, Rippetoe, because of some EMG study.
    Controlled Labs Rep
    nathan @ controlledlabs.com
    Reply With Quote

  9. #39
    90sbaby ProEra's Avatar
    Join Date: Jan 2013
    Location: United States
    Posts: 1,717
    Rep Power: 1057
    ProEra is a jewel in the rough. (+500) ProEra is a jewel in the rough. (+500) ProEra is a jewel in the rough. (+500) ProEra is a jewel in the rough. (+500) ProEra is a jewel in the rough. (+500) ProEra is a jewel in the rough. (+500) ProEra is a jewel in the rough. (+500) ProEra is a jewel in the rough. (+500) ProEra is a jewel in the rough. (+500) ProEra is a jewel in the rough. (+500) ProEra is a jewel in the rough. (+500)
    ProEra is offline
    One a week with weights and once a week with bodyweight **** bruh.
    90sbaby ✰ WE RUNNIN' ✰ OFFICIAL MISC RUNNING CREW ✰ WE RUNNIN' ✰
    Calisthenics crew and weights
    US navy sailor from 2012 to 2014
    Goal:front lever
    Christianity
    Mid 20s crew
    World travel crew
    Bench-315
    Squat-275
    Deadlift-375
    Bulking season over 😁
    Reply With Quote

  10. #40
    Registered User JoeDelts's Avatar
    Join Date: Jan 2018
    Age: 45
    Posts: 2,749
    Rep Power: 17917
    JoeDelts is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) JoeDelts is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) JoeDelts is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) JoeDelts is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) JoeDelts is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) JoeDelts is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) JoeDelts is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) JoeDelts is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) JoeDelts is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) JoeDelts is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) JoeDelts is a splendid one to behold. (+10000)
    JoeDelts is online now
    I've run upper/lower, ppl, bro splits etc...
    In the beginning I was really concerned with finding the best "bang for your buck" program. As time went on though I realised that consistency over the long term is what's most important. That and intensity. How much energy you're putting into your sets/workouts. IMO you'll get the best results following a program that you like most (or dislike the least) and really given'er with your workouts.

    Long after the low hanging fruit of beginner gains have been thoroughly picked, you should be looking at your progress from year to year. If you've made improvements over where you were a year ago than you're doing things right as a natty.
    Reply With Quote

  11. #41
    Banned sooby's Avatar
    Join Date: Feb 2015
    Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts: 18,964
    Rep Power: 0
    sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    sooby is offline
    Originally Posted by Farley1324 View Post
    Semantics, meaning that what the coaches and trainers (and athletes) observe has a different name than what they are giving it, that's one thing (suggestion that peripheral fatigue is being called CNS fatigue). But saying the coaches/etc are not even properly attributing what they observe or experience (by whatever name) to the correct cause...that I'm not buying based on an EMG study.

    Almost seems like the implication by the EMG study is that what people call overtraining is CNS fatigue and what people call CNS fatigue is peripheral fatigue...maybe...but I'm not about to toss the direct statements or implications and consistencies of guys like Wendler, Simmons, Rippetoe, because of some EMG study.
    That's the thing though. It isn't based on "an" EMG study, there are literally a dozen plus studies using different modalities so I'm not sure you can really just brush it off to the side like that. CNS fatigue is defined as simply a decrease in central motor activation leading to decreased voluntary muscle activation. An EMG literally measures activation, the exact thing that these studies are trying to find out, it isn't like we are trying to correlate activation with hypertrophy and what not and make guesses.

    CNS fatigue isn't a "fitness" term it is actually a medical term. And like with many medical terms that make its way into fitness circles they become butchered and mis-applied (i.e: overtraining) and become mostly BS. What is there not to buy? People observed a phenomena and just assumed that it was "CNS Fatigue" without any medical literature or anything else to support it. Like, how would you know that it is your CNS rather than your peripheral system is fatigued? So assuming it is "CNS Fatigue" because a few big names in the powerlifting industry said it was doesn't make it the default position here. Especially when the literature and documentation runs contrary to that. It is a FACT that prolonged exercise is the biggest and most common cause of CNS Fatigue.

    The whole term "CNS fatigue" and it's popularity in general fitness circles likely came from Louie Simmons who was highly influenced by the Russian system of lifting of the 60s. Obviously what we know now wasn't known back then so it's more than likely his info is just outdated. And also the semantics of it doesn't really matter too much because fatigue is fatigue and the same protocols in general apply (i.e: using deloads). But repeated activation of the muscle rather than a short, acute peak in CNS activation is more implicated in CNS fatigue and that has been demonstrably proven. Not saying CNS isn't a factor, but it isn't nearly the factor as everybody says it is and it's effects are seen mostly intra-workout or directly post-workout.

    It's kind of weird you would mention guys like Wendler, Simmons, etc as if their word is infallible or they are right 100% of the time, especially with good evidence of the contrary. It's still important to do your own research. Now this isn't a knock on them because they aren't neuroscientists or physiologists and one wouldn't expect them to know the whole mechanism behind CNS fatigue (it still isn't completely understood but we at least do know it isn't a huge factor in most cases).

    Also ironic that you mention Rippetoe, because this is a direct statement from Rippetoe himself about CNS fatigue.

    https://startingstrength.com/resourc...s-fatigue.html

    I think it's just an internet broscience term, used by people unfamiliar with neuromuscular physiology. I have yet to see a neural mechanism proposed to explain it. Neither has Stef, who has a terminal degree in neuroscience.
    Even he thinks it's a BS broscience term that is misapplied by the general fitness population. Look i'm not saying you have to agree with me or anything I'm just pointing out all of the facts. I think even Wendler calls it "silly" although I'm not sure of the context behind it. The whole notion of "My CNS is burned out wat do" is just kind of ridiculous, like what? did somebody dip your cortex in molten lava or something? Because this is not an accurate description of reality.
    Reply With Quote

  12. #42
    We know lol Farley1324's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2008
    Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
    Posts: 120,453
    Rep Power: 451766
    Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000)
    Farley1324 is offline
    Originally Posted by sooby View Post
    That's the thing though. It isn't based on "an" EMG study, there are literally a dozen plus studies using different modalities so I'm not sure you can really just brush it off to the side like that. CNS fatigue is defined as simply a decrease in central motor activation leading to decreased voluntary muscle activation. An EMG literally measures activation, the exact thing that these studies are trying to find out, it isn't like we are trying to correlate activation with hypertrophy and what not and make guesses.

    CNS fatigue isn't a "fitness" term it is actually a medical term. And like with many medical terms that make its way into fitness circles they become butchered and mis-applied (i.e: overtraining) and become mostly BS. What is there not to buy? People observed a phenomena and just assumed that it was "CNS Fatigue" without any medical literature or anything else to support it. Like, how would you know that it is your CNS rather than your peripheral system is fatigued? So assuming it is "CNS Fatigue" because a few big names in the powerlifting industry said it was doesn't make it the default position here. Especially when the literature and documentation runs contrary to that. It is a FACT that prolonged exercise is the biggest and most common cause of CNS Fatigue.

    The whole term "CNS fatigue" and it's popularity in general fitness circles likely came from Louie Simmons who was highly influenced by the Russian system of lifting of the 60s. Obviously what we know now wasn't known back then so it's more than likely his info is just outdated. And also the semantics of it doesn't really matter too much because fatigue is fatigue and the same protocols in general apply (i.e: using deloads). But repeated activation of the muscle rather than a short, acute peak in CNS activation is more implicated in CNS fatigue and that has been demonstrably proven. Not saying CNS isn't a factor, but it isn't nearly the factor as everybody says it is and it's effects are seen mostly intra-workout or directly post-workout.

    It's kind of weird you would mention guys like Wendler, Simmons, etc as if their word is infallible or they are right 100% of the time, especially with good evidence of the contrary. It's still important to do your own research. Now this isn't a knock on them because they aren't neuroscientists or physiologists and one wouldn't expect them to know the whole mechanism behind CNS fatigue (it still isn't completely understood but we at least do know it isn't a huge factor in most cases).

    Also ironic that you mention Rippetoe, because this is a direct statement from Rippetoe himself about CNS fatigue.

    https://startingstrength.com/resourc...s-fatigue.html



    Even he thinks it's a BS broscience term that is misapplied by the general fitness population. Look i'm not saying you have to agree with me or anything I'm just pointing out all of the facts. I think even Wendler calls it "silly" although I'm not sure of the context behind it. The whole notion of "My CNS is burned out wat do" is just kind of ridiculous, like what? did somebody dip your cortex in molten lava or something? Because this is not an accurate description of reality.
    What's weird about pointing out similarities between different coaches with different experiences who each have far more experience than any of us could ever dream of?

    That was a very long post to basically say that it is semantics in that what is often referred to as "CNS fatigue" is something else, perhaps "peripheral fatigue". And, as I said, if the wrong term is being used, medically, then the wrong term is being used...but that doesn't invalidate the cause/effect relationships that the experienced coaches all seem to know about.

    It's one thing to say the wrong term is being applied to an observed phenomenon, it's another thing to say everybody is wrong about the cause/effect (frequency, intensity, volume...). If Louie Simmons for example says it's bad to lift above 90% for three or more than three straight weeks because you'll fail due to CNS fatigue, the fact that what he is observing is maybe peripheral fatigue or some other term other than "CNS fatigue" doesn't mean that suddenly the weight being used (intensity) is irrelevant. Not buying that.
    Controlled Labs Rep
    nathan @ controlledlabs.com
    Reply With Quote

  13. #43
    22-3 Orlando1234977's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2006
    Location: Wisconsin, United States
    Posts: 13,133
    Rep Power: 77664
    Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000) Orlando1234977 has a brilliant future. Third best rank! (+40000)
    Orlando1234977 is offline
    Originally Posted by Farley1324 View Post
    Big experience guys such as Louise Simmons say otherwise.
    Originally Posted by WolfRose7 View Post
    Semantics/out-dated info

    Louise is awesome, was never exactly a anatomist though
    Entirely plausible he would end up doing the right things, for the wrong reason, or at least wrongly attributed reason
    Wolfrose & sooby, just to clarify, you're going to go with a couple studies you find online over all the top strength coaches and people with practical experience, that's the angle you're going with?

    Also look at that study again,
    "Purpose: To examine quadriceps muscle fatigue and central motor output during fatiguing single joint exercise at 40% and 80% maximal torque output in resistance trained men."

    Really?
    DR. 3time (until they quit, or it'd be DR. 6time)
    Did you really think you can attack Cobra Kai and there wouldn't be any consequences?
    They drew first blood not me
    Brewers, Bucks, Badgers, Packers
    ~Cobra Kai Crew~
    Reply With Quote

  14. #44
    We know lol Farley1324's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2008
    Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
    Posts: 120,453
    Rep Power: 451766
    Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000)
    Farley1324 is offline
    hmm

    Isometric knee extensor exercise?

    Lawd


    Yeah I don't think I recall anybody talking about CNS fatigue because they went too heavy too frequently on their leg extensions
    Controlled Labs Rep
    nathan @ controlledlabs.com
    Reply With Quote

  15. #45
    Registered User WolfRose7's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2016
    Location: United Kingdom (Great Britain)
    Age: 26
    Posts: 8,986
    Rep Power: 44145
    WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) WolfRose7 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    WolfRose7 is online now
    Originally Posted by Orlando1234977 View Post
    Wolfrose & sooby, just to clarify, you're going to go with a couple studies you find online over all the top strength coaches and people with practical experience, that's the angle you're going with?

    Also look at that study again,
    "Purpose: To examine quadriceps muscle fatigue and central motor output during fatiguing single joint exercise at 40% and 80% maximal torque output in resistance trained men."

    Really?
    Nope not even slightly. Every fact and study about central fatigue shows its relation to endurance exercises.

    Its not even a debate.. You're picking 1 study I posted out of 1000s that exist...

    And for the record.. This fanboy regurgitate **** backfires when several names listed have commented on the bromyth version of Cns fatigue.

    https://startingstrength.com/resourc...s-fatigue.html

    I think it's just an internet broscience term, used by people unfamiliar with neuromuscular physiology. I have yet to see a neural mechanism proposed to explain it. Neither has Stef, who has a terminal degree in neuroscience.
    Also, coaches coach. Neuroscientists neuroscience... We are discussing neuroscience not coaching. So which is more relevant. A Neuroscientist or a powerlifter...
    Last edited by WolfRose7; 09-18-2018 at 04:36 PM.
    2018 Log
    https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=175232661

    FMH Crew, Sandbagging Mike Tuscherer Wannabee
    Reply With Quote

  16. #46
    Banned maddog352002's Avatar
    Join Date: Apr 2018
    Posts: 1,230
    Rep Power: 0
    maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000) maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000) maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000) maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000) maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000) maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000) maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000) maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000) maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000) maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000) maddog352002 is a name known to all. (+5000)
    maddog352002 is offline
    Oh yeah but what about lack of Spunkamine as mentioned right after Rippetoe?

    Neuromuscular Fatigue (n.): a condition in which a variable and subjectively-determined level of training intensity and volume have depleted presynaptic and synaptic cleft concentrations of spunkamine. Spunkamine is a catechol neurotransmitter that mediates a number of critical higher brain functions, particularly determination, fortitude, resilience, commitment, perception of gonadal size, and self-respect. Spunkamine is found exclusively in the neocortex, in areas involved with attention, imagination, and self-loathing. Motor end-plate neurotransmitter concentrations, nerve conduction velocities, motor unit recruitment and high-energy phosphate levels and myophysiology are unaffected in this disorder. This tragic condition is the subject of intensive research, particularly by franchise fitness facilities, supplement manufacturers, and personal injury attorneys.

    After a disappointing work out, who hasn't worried about their perceived gonadal size.
    Reply With Quote

  17. #47
    We know lol Farley1324's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2008
    Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
    Posts: 120,453
    Rep Power: 451766
    Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000)
    Farley1324 is offline
    Originally Posted by WolfRose7 View Post
    We are discussing neuroscience not coaching.
    I thought we were discussing training? That's the problem here, I guess...you're just going on and on about what term is used to describe a training thing, while we are concerned with the actual training thing.

    For purposes of training and programming and routine and coaches, it doesn't matter in the slightest if what people call "CNS fatigue" should be called "peripheral fatigue", well it matters only in that people can communicate what they are referring to and be understood by the reader/listener...but what really matters is what it is, whatever term or name is used, what causes it, and what the routine or programming should do or be to account for it.

    Please get off making this all about the nomenclature being wrong and let's talk about if doing isometric leg extensions is a good judge of heavy squats and deadlifts and if intensity and frequency are relevant factors to whatever-name we are going to use for the fatigue commonly referred to as CNS fatigue.
    Controlled Labs Rep
    nathan @ controlledlabs.com
    Reply With Quote

  18. #48
    "Thats what!" -She MyEgoProblem's Avatar
    Join Date: Jan 2015
    Location: United Kingdom (Great Britain)
    Posts: 5,552
    Rep Power: 52441
    MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    MyEgoProblem is offline
    This clusterf**k is just miscommunication...

    The phenomonen of lifting too heavy too often et al is real. We know its real.. no question.

    some of the first signs are your grip failing on lifts you normally have no trouble with.

    Its just thatbits the peripheral nervous system and neuromuscular system that are the issue here. Not the central nervous system.

    The terms akin to "Cns fatigue" "fried cns" are inappropriately used and isnt the same as the actual agreed medical terminology. Its just bro slang...

    The phenomonon is real..
    The bro nomeclature is technically wrong..
    Cns fatigue is a different issue.
    Das it.
    FMH crew's T-Rex.

    All time: 240/115/255(610)kgs <gym/raw>
    Reply With Quote

  19. #49
    We know lol Farley1324's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2008
    Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
    Posts: 120,453
    Rep Power: 451766
    Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000)
    Farley1324 is offline
    Originally Posted by MyEgoProblem View Post
    This clusterf**k is just miscommunication...

    The phenomonen of lifting too heavy too often et al is real. We know its real.. no question.

    some of the first signs are your grip failing on lifts you normally have no trouble with.

    Its just thatbits the peripheral nervous system and neuromuscular system that are the issue here. Not the central nervous system.

    The terms akin to "Cns fatigue" "fried cns" are inappropriately used and isnt the same as the actual agreed medical terminology. Its just bro slang...

    The phenomonon is real..
    The bro nomeclature is technically wrong..
    Cns fatigue is a different issue.
    Das it.
    That, exactly that ^


    So, the bottom line...what is it that primarily contributes to or causes this? With regards to frequency, intensity, volume, exercise selection, etc. Are isometric knee extensions at 40% or 80% a valid test that can be extrapolated to high intensity (say, 90% or higher) squats and deads?
    Controlled Labs Rep
    nathan @ controlledlabs.com
    Reply With Quote

  20. #50
    "Thats what!" -She MyEgoProblem's Avatar
    Join Date: Jan 2015
    Location: United Kingdom (Great Britain)
    Posts: 5,552
    Rep Power: 52441
    MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) MyEgoProblem has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    MyEgoProblem is offline
    Without a specialist..
    Dunno if we have enough info to say tbf.

    But if they use a test and can pull conclusions and accurate results from it. Must work?

    I know my strength tanks when i overdo it big time.. time before last thst i ran bulgarian and pulled singles too often at too high of an rpe... my grip went, i couldnt break the floor, my squat suffered and my numbers where all down. *should have listened to nuckols and toned deads down*

    I took a few days 'rest' doing minimal work & weight for a week and recovered, and ramped back up quickly.

    My whole body, nervous system and muscles was overtaxed, and im sure this is what the bros/louie call "fried cns" .

    I've seen ways around this, varying intensity, volume, lift, just dialing it back..
    the John phung technique works, as does bugenhagens for high freq, high intensity training.
    Last edited by MyEgoProblem; 09-19-2018 at 06:10 AM.
    FMH crew's T-Rex.

    All time: 240/115/255(610)kgs <gym/raw>
    Reply With Quote

  21. #51
    Registered User pondman's Avatar
    Join Date: Feb 2013
    Age: 58
    Posts: 758
    Rep Power: 476
    pondman has a spectacular aura about. (+250) pondman has a spectacular aura about. (+250) pondman has a spectacular aura about. (+250) pondman has a spectacular aura about. (+250) pondman has a spectacular aura about. (+250) pondman has a spectacular aura about. (+250) pondman has a spectacular aura about. (+250) pondman has a spectacular aura about. (+250) pondman has a spectacular aura about. (+250) pondman has a spectacular aura about. (+250) pondman has a spectacular aura about. (+250)
    pondman is offline
    I do a 4 day per week program that hits the compounds 1 time per week (at 6 x3) , and 2 times with a substitute on other rotating days. And then it rotates the auxiliaries at higher reps. I have to add a few things. Such as on the OHP days, I do additional high rep rowing, laterals, and reverses. It helps eliminate discomfort and speed recovery. Without it I don't think I could do the OHP consistently.
    Reply With Quote

  22. #52
    Banned sooby's Avatar
    Join Date: Feb 2015
    Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts: 18,964
    Rep Power: 0
    sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    sooby is offline
    Originally Posted by Farley1324 View Post
    What's weird about pointing out similarities between different coaches with different experiences who each have far more experience than any of us could ever dream of?

    That was a very long post to basically say that it is semantics in that what is often referred to as "CNS fatigue" is something else, perhaps "peripheral fatigue". And, as I said, if the wrong term is being used, medically, then the wrong term is being used...but that doesn't invalidate the cause/effect relationships that the experienced coaches all seem to know about.

    It's one thing to say the wrong term is being applied to an observed phenomenon, it's another thing to say everybody is wrong about the cause/effect (frequency, intensity, volume...). If Louie Simmons for example says it's bad to lift above 90% for three or more than three straight weeks because you'll fail due to CNS fatigue, the fact that what he is observing is maybe peripheral fatigue or some other term other than "CNS fatigue" doesn't mean that suddenly the weight being used (intensity) is irrelevant. Not buying that.

    What was weird about it was that you posted "but this guy said this" in response and just kind of immediately brushed off the studies (cuz EMG) that actually defined and measured the results. I can post other reputable coaches who say the exact opposite so who is right? Even Rippetoe himself goes against the idea of taxing the CNS where as Louie Simmons says it is a real thing. They could be talking about two different things entirely that is possible and that is where the confusion and the problem lies, which is why it is important to use the right terms and why I'm addressing it.

    I.e a novice lifter being somebody who can make linear gains on the bar every workout session or every week rather than just simply being new to the gym. A lot of us are quick to point out this distinction so why not in this case???

    I don't think anybody said everybody is wrong because such and such study said so. Of course if you use too much volume and intensity you are going to suffer from fatigue eventually I don't think anybody disputed that at all. This is of course very relevant when talking about PERIPHERAL or MUSCULAR fatigue. Intensity is not particularly relevant when talking about actual CNS fatigue. THAT's the point.

    I'd also like to think I pointed out much more than simple semantics; because I also addressed the idea that it isn't just lifting 90% or lifting heavy weights or even just compound movements. Because intensity/volume/frequency/exercise selection and to a lesser degree how it is split are all relevant. It isn't just "oh heavy 90% deadlifts and 90% squats cause the most fatigue" as higher rep less intensities also have shown to do the same and in my own experience are also just as relevant. Or in other words, how close to your RPE you are working at.


    As far as I am aware I don't think I've seen any studies measuring a set of 15 vs a set of 3 taken to an RPE of 10 and measuring peripheral fatigue levels. Say done over the course of a week. So I don't even think anybody can say for sure which protocol will induce the most peripheral or muscular fatigue, higher intensity or more volume and to what degree each of these variables impact it.




    Originally Posted by Orlando1234977 View Post
    Wolfrose & sooby, just to clarify, you're going to go with a couple studies you find online over all the top strength coaches and people with practical experience, that's the angle you're going with?

    Also look at that study again,
    "Purpose: To examine quadriceps muscle fatigue and central motor output during fatiguing single joint exercise at 40% and 80% maximal torque output in resistance trained men."

    Really?
    Who said that??? Also you said peripheral fatigue recovers faster than central nervous fatigue which is flat out wrong. So after being wrong, now you are going with the false angle that I am somehow overlooking top strength coaches with practical experiences?? I really don't get it. Also you realize there are squat/deadlift studies too but you just cherrypicked the single joint exercises??? And there aren't just a couple studies online, literally 100s, including actual documented literature and mechanisms of how CNS fatigue actually works. So yeah, I'm going with that, not that strength coaches necessarily disagree with what is in the literature to begin with. It's not even mostly just a misunderstanding here like it is with Farley, you're just wrong lol.
    Reply With Quote

  23. #53
    We know lol Farley1324's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2008
    Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
    Posts: 120,453
    Rep Power: 451766
    Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000)
    Farley1324 is offline
    Originally Posted by sooby View Post
    What was weird about it was that you posted "but this guy said this" in response and just kind of immediately brushed off the studies (cuz EMG) that actually defined and measured the results. I can post other reputable coaches who say the exact opposite so who is right?
    Post those coaches who say the exact opposite, please.

    Yes, I posted that the most experienced and accomplished lifters and coaches say and do similar things, I don't believe it is a coincidence that Louie Simmons says you fail if you lift at 90% or above three or more weeks in a row, and Wendlers 5/3/1 has a down week every 3rd week (the 3x5 week) or initially had a deload after each 3 week cycle, and that Rippetoe/Baker version of Texas Method ends up cycling through singles/doubles/triples in a 3 week rotation, for example. It's a trend that keeps emerging from those who have the experience to know what works. And yeah I take their and others cumulative experience over an EMG study using 40%/80% isometric leg extensions.

    Originally Posted by sooby View Post
    Even Rippetoe himself goes against the idea of taxing the CNS where as Louie Simmons says it is a real thing.

    Get over the terminology being wrong and pretend that instead of CNS they said PNS or whatever other term, and let's talk about what should be done from a training and routine and programming perspective, eh? Because there are two issues here, worrying about the wrong word being used (central vs peripheral) and seemingly saying that all of the experienced trainees and coaches are flat wrong about accumulated fatigue from high intensity too frequently being detrimental.

    Originally Posted by sooby View Post
    They could be talking about two different things entirely that is possible and that is where the confusion and the problem lies, which is why it is important to use the right terms and why I'm addressing it.

    I.e a novice lifter being somebody who can make linear gains on the bar every workout session or every week rather than just simply being new to the gym. A lot of us are quick to point out this distinction so why not in this case???
    So this whole thing is because the principles laid out by the experienced coaches should have a different ___ nervous system name? Everything they teach and coach and train and have experienced is correct, works, and should be followed...but we should call it "peripheral nervous system" and not "central nervous system".


    Originally Posted by sooby View Post
    I don't think anybody said everybody is wrong because such and such study said so. Of course if you use too much volume and intensity you are going to suffer from fatigue eventually I don't think anybody disputed that at all. This is of course very relevant when talking about PERIPHERAL or MUSCULAR fatigue. Intensity is not particularly relevant when talking about actual CNS fatigue. THAT's the point.
    Is intensity relevant when talking about the thing that is commonly referred to as CNS fatigue?

    Is 80% intensity isometric leg extension truly relevant to 90%+ intensity squats and deads (and variations thereof)?


    Originally Posted by sooby View Post
    I'd also like to think I pointed out much more than simple semantics; because I also addressed the idea that it isn't just lifting 90% or lifting heavy weights or even just compound movements. Because intensity/volume/frequency/exercise selection and to a lesser degree how it is split are all relevant. It isn't just "oh heavy 90% deadlifts and 90% squats cause the most fatigue" as higher rep less intensities also have shown to do the same and in my own experience are also just as relevant. Or in other words, how close to your RPE you are working at.
    Do you believe 80% 1RM isometric leg extensions are a viable substitute for 90%+ squats and deads in this context?


    Originally Posted by sooby View Post
    As far as I am aware I don't think I've seen any studies measuring a set of 15 vs a set of 3 taken to an RPE of 10 and measuring peripheral fatigue levels. Say done over the course of a week. So I don't even think anybody can say for sure which protocol will induce the most peripheral or muscular fatigue, higher intensity or more volume and to what degree each of these variables impact it.
    Are we just dismissing the most experienced and accomplished lifters and coaches who say there is a difference, because there isn't a study that addresses it? If there was, and they used an isometric leg extension, would it invalidate all of that vast experience with the real lifts?
    Controlled Labs Rep
    nathan @ controlledlabs.com
    Reply With Quote

  24. #54
    Banned sooby's Avatar
    Join Date: Feb 2015
    Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts: 18,964
    Rep Power: 0
    sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    sooby is offline
    Originally Posted by Farley1324 View Post
    Post those coaches who say the exact opposite, please.

    Yes, I posted that the most experienced and accomplished lifters and coaches say and do similar things, I don't believe it is a coincidence that Louie Simmons says you fail if you lift at 90% or above three or more weeks in a row, and Wendlers 5/3/1 has a down week every 3rd week (the 3x5 week) or initially had a deload after each 3 week cycle, and that Rippetoe/Baker version of Texas Method ends up cycling through singles/doubles/triples in a 3 week rotation, for example. It's a trend that keeps emerging from those who have the experience to know what works. And yeah I take their and others cumulative experience over an EMG study using 40%/80% isometric leg extensions.




    Get over the terminology being wrong and pretend that instead of CNS they said PNS or whatever other term, and let's talk about what should be done from a training and routine and programming perspective, eh? Because there are two issues here, worrying about the wrong word being used (central vs peripheral) and seemingly saying that all of the experienced trainees and coaches are flat wrong about accumulated fatigue from high intensity too frequently being detrimental.



    So this whole thing is because the principles laid out by the experienced coaches should have a different ___ nervous system name? Everything they teach and coach and train and have experienced is correct, works, and should be followed...but we should call it "peripheral nervous system" and not "central nervous system".




    Is intensity relevant when talking about the thing that is commonly referred to as CNS fatigue?

    Is 80% intensity isometric leg extension truly relevant to 90%+ intensity squats and deads (and variations thereof)?




    Do you believe 80% 1RM isometric leg extensions are a viable substitute for 90%+ squats and deads in this context?




    Are we just dismissing the most experienced and accomplished lifters and coaches who say there is a difference, because there isn't a study that addresses it? If there was, and they used an isometric leg extension, would it invalidate all of that vast experience with the real lifts?

    First point: I just did, with Rippetoe saying that CNS fatigue is something that broscientists would say while Louis Simmons acknowledges as a real thing. So I'm asking how do you know they are actually saying the same thing or they are actually countering each others points??? Which is exactly my point and where the confusion lies entirely. And if it isn't how would you reconcile that? And that was meant more as a hypothetical, if one coach says one thing, one says the other who are you going to follow? Because it isn't about one coaches word against another or following strictly one study or strictly one coach and taking that as gospel.

    Second point: They're all important. If you don't see that that's okay too. See point 1 as well.

    Third point: What exactly are you not understanding? Notice how I didn't argue anything about 90% intensity or lifting heavy weights being fatiguing. It just isn't CNS fatigue which is what some of you guys are referring to as. That's all. As long with other misconceptions.

    Fourth Point: If you re-read what you just quoted your answer is right there. It's relevant in the context of CNS fatigue (in which there are studies also doing heavy squats and deadlifts as well which don't show a prolonged CNS fatigue). Presumably if we are talking about PNS fatigue squats/deadlifts use more musculature it would likely be more fatiguing in that aspect.

    Fifth Point: If we are talking about CNS fatigue yes. not sure why you are in love with leg extensions lol because you do realize there are other studies that use actual squats and deadlifts.

    Sixth point: You're ignoring the fact that all the factors I've listed (volume, intensity, etc) all contribute to muscular fatigue, can you claim which factor is more impactful than the other? What evidence do you have? Or are you just going to say because this guy said so and take it as gospel? Training to failure in general leads to high muscular fatigue, whether it is reps of 3, 5, 6, 10, 20. Most coaches believe this I would imagine. And I've also trained using singles and high reps for compound movements. In my experience training to failure, no matter the rep range, they all lead to very high muscular fatigue to the point where it is difficult to say which one is more fatiguing to the other if they are all taken to failure. Whether I used 70% or 90%. Both are to failure, both recruit maximum amount or motor units, what is it about "higher intensity" weights that inherently causes more peripheral fatigue that you speak of??? How are we measuring which is more fatiguing? Certain protocols such as eccentric training are also known to cause lots of fatigue.
    Last edited by sooby; 09-18-2018 at 07:51 PM.
    Reply With Quote

  25. #55
    We know lol Farley1324's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2008
    Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
    Posts: 120,453
    Rep Power: 451766
    Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000)
    Farley1324 is offline
    Originally Posted by sooby View Post
    First point: I just did, with Rippetoe saying that CNS fatigue is something that broscientists would say while Louis Simmons acknowledges as a real thing. So I'm asking how do you know they are actually saying the same thing or they are actually countering each others points???

    Which is exactly my point and where the confusion lies entirely. And if it isn't how would you reconcile that? And that was meant more as a hypothetical, if one coach says one thing, one says the other who are you going to follow? Because it isn't about one coaches word against another or following strictly one study or strictly one coach and taking that as gospel.

    Second point: They're all important. If you don't see that that's okay too. See point 1 as well.

    Third point: What exactly are you not understanding? Notice how I didn't argue anything about 90% intensity or lifting heavy weights being fatiguing. It just isn't CNS fatigue which is what some of you guys are referring to as. That's all. As long with other misconceptions.

    Fourth Point: If you re-read what you just quoted your answer is right there. It's relevant in the context of CNS fatigue (in which there are studies also doing heavy squats and deadlifts as well which don't show a prolonged CNS fatigue). Presumably if we are talking about PNS fatigue squats/deadlifts use more musculature it would likely be more fatiguing in that aspect.

    Fifth Point: If we are talking about CNS fatigue yes. not sure why you are in love with leg extensions lol because you do realize there are other studies that use actual squats and deadlifts.

    Sixth point: You're ignoring the fact that all the factors I've listed (volume, intensity, etc) all contribute to muscular fatigue, can you claim which factor is more impactful than the other? What evidence do you have? Or are you just going to say because this guy said so and take it as gospel? Training to failure in general leads to high muscular fatigue, whether it is reps of 3, 5, 6, 10, 20. Most coaches believe this I would imagine. And I've also trained using singles and high reps for compound movements. In my experience training to failure, no matter the rep range, they all lead to very high muscular fatigue to the point where it is difficult to say which one is more fatiguing to the other if they are all taken to failure. Whether I used 70% or 90%. Both are to failure, both recruit maximum amount or motor units, what is it about "higher intensity" weights that inherently causes more peripheral fatigue that you speak of??? How are we measuring which is more fatiguing? Certain protocols such as eccentric training are also known to cause lots of fatigue.
    Too convoluted to follow in this format. Don't know what you are responding to.

    Why don't we stop talking about "CNS fatigue", which is seemingly only quantified by EMG studies using isometric leg extensions up to 80% intensity (seriously?) and talk about whatever it is that is traditionally referred to as CNS fatigue?

    Why are we still stuck on this cns fatigue as measured by not that heavy leg extensions?

    I also have yet to see where the known and experienced coaches contradict. So far all I've see is ripp saying that the medical term CNS fatigue is not applicable. Okay. So, for what it is that is commonly referred to as CNS fatigue, where do we stand??

    Still here

    Originally Posted by MyEgoProblem View Post
    This clusterf**k is just miscommunication...

    The phenomonen of lifting too heavy too often et al is real. We know its real.. no question.

    some of the first signs are your grip failing on lifts you normally have no trouble with.

    Its just thatbits the peripheral nervous system and neuromuscular system that are the issue here. Not the central nervous system.

    The terms akin to "Cns fatigue" "fried cns" are inappropriately used and isnt the same as the actual agreed medical terminology. Its just bro slang...

    The phenomonon is real..
    The bro nomeclature is technically wrong..
    Cns fatigue is a different issue.
    Das it.
    At this ^



    It's not like we have a confusion of terms. It's not like we talk CNS and PNS and something else and have them wrong, like using the word intensity when you mean RPE...if you believe this isometric leg extension thing you can then replace "CNS" with "PNS" and the result is the same, yes? Let's get to that point.
    Controlled Labs Rep
    nathan @ controlledlabs.com
    Reply With Quote

  26. #56
    Tu papi Jasonk282's Avatar
    Join Date: Dec 2010
    Location: United States
    Posts: 30,327
    Rep Power: 71033
    Jasonk282 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Jasonk282 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Jasonk282 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Jasonk282 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Jasonk282 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Jasonk282 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Jasonk282 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Jasonk282 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Jasonk282 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Jasonk282 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) Jasonk282 has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    Jasonk282 is offline
    Lifting heavy near maximal weights makes you tired...why? We dont exactly know.
    Union ironworker, USMC vet, muay thai, kyokushin kartae, judoka
    Reply With Quote

  27. #57
    Banned sooby's Avatar
    Join Date: Feb 2015
    Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts: 18,964
    Rep Power: 0
    sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    sooby is offline
    Originally Posted by Farley1324 View Post
    Too convoluted to follow in this format. Don't know what you are responding to.

    Why don't we stop talking about "CNS fatigue", which is seemingly only quantified by EMG studies using isometric leg extensions up to 80% intensity (seriously?) and talk about whatever it is that is traditionally referred to as CNS fatigue?

    Why are we still stuck on this cns fatigue as measured by not that heavy leg extensions?

    I also have yet to see where the known and experienced coaches contradict. So far all I've see is ripp saying that the medical term CNS fatigue is not applicable. Okay. So, for what it is that is commonly referred to as CNS fatigue, where do we stand??

    Still here



    At this ^



    It's not like we have a confusion of terms. It's not like we talk CNS and PNS and something else and have them wrong, like using the word intensity when you mean RPE...if you believe this isometric leg extension thing you can then replace "CNS" with "PNS" and the result is the same, yes? Let's get to that point.
    So you want to stop talking about "CNS fatigue", when that was the whole basis of why this discussion began? It also isn't only "quantified" by EMG studies using leg extensions as there are studies using squats and deadlifts as well. But we are going to ignore that I guess as well as ignore every study that is less than perfect despite the heaps of evidence out there as well as articles detailing it. If that is the case and you are going to immediately disqualify something because it doesn't fit what you've believe there honestly really isn't anything we can talk about here.

    That and besides the fact we all generally agree on the fact that high intensity workouts absolutely do affect PNS and that you can't sustain it for a long period of time? What else do you want to talk about besides that??? Intensity, RPE, not quite the same analogy but okay. Nobody really mistakes the two because the two terms are quite clear as one refers to % of your 1RM and the other refers to reps left in the tank/bar speed and aren't misnomers for one another in general and are actually interchangeable depending on what protocol you want to use when it comes to program .... again why are we talking about leg extensions lol?? When that was just one of the numerous studies?
    Reply With Quote

  28. #58
    We know lol Farley1324's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2008
    Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
    Posts: 120,453
    Rep Power: 451766
    Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000)
    Farley1324 is offline
    Originally Posted by sooby View Post
    s the fact we all generally agree on the fact that high intensity workouts absolutely do affect PNS and that you can't sustain it for a long period of time?
    I didn't realize we did agree on that.

    So all this boils down to, go back and replace all of the CNS references made over the years with PNS instead, and...that's all there is to it, eh?

    BTW if there are squat and deadlift studies why is it that the study posted in this thread that gets referenced is about isometric leg extensions? Throw up the squat and deadlift studies.
    Controlled Labs Rep
    nathan @ controlledlabs.com
    Reply With Quote

  29. #59
    Banned sooby's Avatar
    Join Date: Feb 2015
    Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts: 18,964
    Rep Power: 0
    sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000) sooby has much to be proud of. One of the best! (+20000)
    sooby is offline
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26308090

    CAR - Central Activation Ratio remained unchanged after doing push press, squat and split squats. But neuromuscular fatigue was displayed (peripheral).

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28704311

    Compares CNS fatigue between squat and deadlift, not much difference in terms of CNS fatigue. But only a 5-10% reduction in output in CNS was seen and this effect doesn't last very long.
    Reply With Quote

  30. #60
    We know lol Farley1324's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2008
    Location: Cumming, Georgia, United States
    Posts: 120,453
    Rep Power: 451766
    Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000) Farley1324 has a reputation beyond repute. Second best rank possible! (+100000)
    Farley1324 is offline
    Originally Posted by sooby View Post
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26308090

    CAR - Central Activation Ratio remained unchanged after doing push press, squat and split squats. But neuromuscular fatigue was displayed (peripheral).

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28704311

    Compares CNS fatigue between squat and deadlift, not much difference in terms of CNS fatigue. But only a 5-10% reduction in output in CNS was seen and this effect doesn't last very long.
    "These results suggest that separate periodization, tapering and programming considerations may be unnecessary when using the squat and deadlift to develop muscular strength."


    Uh, are they really claiming what I think they are claiming? Because, lol
    Controlled Labs Rep
    nathan @ controlledlabs.com
    Reply With Quote

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts