Different Techniques for Dynamic Training

[loopy]

Howdy all,

In body building and weight lifting, there's two different ways to train - you can do short repititions of your maximum weight, and try to push as much as you can, or you can do many repititions at a lower weight, which will effect tone and muscle definition. Is there any correlation between this training, and dynamic training? For example, is there any difference between trying to beat your PB every session, or doing a lot of repititions of a distance you're comfortable with? From personal experience, I can do 50m fairly comfortably, and from practising this distance repeatedly, I've managed to delay where I start to get contractions. I can push out and get around 60m (set 63m as a PB today), but I thought it may be better to see what peoples opinion on training is. Thanks for any input.


Loopy

 

[DeepThought]

Well, told ya most of my thoughts on the ICQ,
Steamlining and Hypercapnia practice.

 

[efattah]

Comments

Static & Dynamic are similar in the sense that your body, at this moment, has some theoretical limit you can reach (probably around 6'00 in static and 100m in dynamic). This is true even if you can only do 3'00 and 60m. The early phase of training just improves your technique, and increases your tolerance to holding your breath. It does not increase your body's maximum potential. This is similar to body building. In the first month of lifting weights, you gain very little muscle. Instead, your neuromuscular coordination improves, allowing you to lift heavier weights. Eventually this fast progress will slow. At that point, the muscles will not get stronger unless you cause micro-damage to them. Your body always follows the age old rule, 'if it ain't broken, then don't fix it.' So, practicing submaximal dynamics will improve you in the beginning, (like in weight lifting), but then you will hit a plateau. To continue improving beyond the plateau, you will either have to keep improving your technique & relaxation, or you will have to actually increase the amount of stored energy (blood & O2) in your body, or you will have to increase the efficiency of your muscles, or the magnitude of your blood shift, and so on.


Eric Fattah
BC, Canada

 

[loopy]

Excellent

Good stuff, thanks again Eric, exactly the kind of info I was after


Loopy

 

[Walrus]

Hey Loopy,

just to let you know 2 out of 3 of the Australian Men's team from the Pacific cup live in the same town as you !

I think we did OK for a couple of Canberra boy's, being at least 2 hours drive away from the coast.

We used to train a lot at the civic pool, there is another guy who trained with us too. If we had enough people could almost start a club.

Might not do so much in the next couple of weeks, but if you are interested in training and stuff let me know.


Cheers,
Walter

 

[loopy]

Yes!!!

yes most definately!!! PM heading your way!!!


Loopy

 

[loopy]

Walrus

Walter mate, PM's don't seem to be getting through... email me at b.drew@adfa.edu.au if you can. Cheers

Loopy

 

[gerard]

Re: Comments

Originally posted by efattah
or you will have to increase the efficiency of your muscles

Do you mean that increased muscle mass is benefitial in apnea?

I'd like to know the accuracy of what I am pointing out.

My thought is that increased muscle mass means a greater O2 consumption, therefore inefficient in terms of maintaining a higher 02 storage which should be kept in order to avoid hypoxia as it frequently happens in apnea.

Regards, gerard.

 

[O'Boy]

Increasing efficiency

I think that to increase the efficiency of the muscles doesn't mean to make some more muscle mass but to make them work better under the same conditions (less O2 consumption = better condition, more glycolitic muscle fibres...)
You are right. More musles = higher O2 consumption.

 

[efattah]

Mo' muscle

Every muscle fiber stores energy. Fast twitch fibers store their energy mainly as ATP and creatine phosphate. Slow twitch fibers store their energy mainly as oxygen bound in myoglobin. Endurance trained muscles have so many capillaries that they store a large amount of blood (which stores oxygen).

But, a 'big' muscle built by taking steroids is not a functional muscle. In a steroid built muscle, as many as 50% of the muscle fibers are pointing in the wrong direction, and don't contribute to muscle contraction.

So, in true muscle, bigger = more stored energy.

It is also true that muscles have resting oxygen requirements. This is why having huge arm muscles is not useful if you are only kicking with your legs. However, one may also argue that huge arm muscles will store lots of blood, and that blood will pool to the core during the blood shift, increasing the total available blood to the brain & organs.

One thing is quite certain; bigger muscles means shorter statics. All that stored energy in those muscles is not fully used during a static; yet those big muscles consume more oxygen.

So, my theory is:
- Big TRUE muscles = deeper diving capacity = shorter statics


Eric Fattah
BC, Canada

 

[gerard]

Re: Mo' muscle

Originally posted by efattah
But, a 'big' muscle built by taking steroids is not a functional muscle. In a steroid built muscle, as many as 50% of the muscle fibers are pointing in the wrong direction, and don't contribute to muscle contraction

I don't believe of steroids even at pro level in any sport, as I don't believe in EPO, caffeine, ephedrine, clenbuterol, and all those fancy chemicals.

BTW I have never taken any performance enhacing drugs and I never will. I hope this remains clear.


[/B][/QUOTE]One thing is quite certain; bigger muscles means shorter statics. All that stored energy in those muscles is not fully used during a static; yet those big muscles consume more oxygen.

So my theory theory is:
- Big TRUE muscles = deeper diving capacity = shorter statics
[/B][/QUOTE]


True that's why my statics are shocking bad. Only 2 minutes , knowing that I was almost a pro cyclist 6 years ago. But I have bulked up a lot since then. Today I am 93 Kg at a 12% bodyfat. Back then I was 74 Kg at 7-8%.

The thing is that increased muscle mass has helped my in dynamic but I am afraid of breaking the sticking point I am in as I don't have any buddies right now.

Thanks for your replies guys, especially to you Eric.

Bye.

 

[ivan]

hi

If big muscles means poorer statics than you wont see me doin weights.

cheers

 

[loopy]

At the risk of more depth? Hmm, go for a trade-off - Seb Murat

 

[Skindiver]

I dont think so.

My theory is that 99% of athletes will not get to the point at which their body is the limiting factor. ( except sports where a maximum effort needs less psychological conditioning and plenty physical conditioning ie sprinting or powerlifting etc.

Before any physiology gets in the way of freediving performance the psychological barriers will pose the first limits. ( Technique aside ) Physiology will have some bearing at the 90 -100 % end of the scale of a theoretical maximum potential but up to that point its your own mind, and your techniques.

For someone to get stuck at 4.00 minutes and say oh .. its because i have big muscles is daft. He is probably sitting at only 65 % of his potential even with the biggest muscles.
I'm sure he could come to 90% of his potential with a good mindset. His muscles and other physio factors may rob him of 10% but only towards the end of the potential scale not throughout his development.
Moreover he will in his life prolly never reach his theoretical 90% max potential anyway where his body becomes a hindrance.

My 300 bucks worth.

Skindiver.

 

[efattah]

Disagree

Most freedivers on a competitive level stop their dive, dynamic or static because they are about to black out, and most of them could continue (and black out) if they wanted to. This shows that psychology is not holding them back. Maybe a calmer mind would have extended their time/depth, but they are still encountering a physiological barrier.


Eric Fattah
BC, Canada

 

[TMcKee]

Well, what if you're big already because of genetics and you train your muscles to be more efficient? Im a pretty big guy(245lbs/111.37kg), but my static laying in my bed is 3:30. I can do a not-so-hard 50m dynamic, and my static time has reached 2:17 @ 12ft. Apnea walking works, people! I am also shooting for 4:00 by the end of this year(in my bed)

Is there a happy medium?

Tim

 

[gerard]

It's a complex subject

For instance, can you explain me guys how yogis are capable of performing all those unreal physical feats by just using their minds, which are in total control of their bodies?

And I am not talking about VO2 max, stroke volume, anaerobic threshold, increased capillarisation, bla, bla, bla. Freediving is closer to mind over body than cycling or cross-country skiing, although physical fitness helps.

I don't know if it is a bogus or not but I can recall watching on TV a yogi performing a 40 min dive in apnea. You may say that's ridiculous, it has been set up by the Media, it's just pure marketing to sell something. The problem is that I watched that when I was 8-9 years old (around years 74-75). I also remember that yogi doing a very long static (20-30 min) in the bottom of the pool while in the lotus position.

I wish I could see that today to check the veracity of all that yogi stuff.

Anyway you need a lot of determination to become a yogi living in a western culture with a mind full of western values. But I'll give it a try once a leave the city and live in a quiet place by the coast (I am really looking forward to finish Uni :head).

BTW, if some of you are not aware living in a city is contraproductive in terms of 02 maximisation as CO2 binds to haemoglobin twice more than 02 molecules therefore hindering aerobic performance, and this is because of air pollution. or instance how many of you have seen top endurance athletes living in a city. I haven't, just look at myself. I could have been a top cyclist if I lived in a small country town in the north of Spain like Miguel Indurain, or Pedro Delgado (Segovia). And all that mastress :duh. Buuff no more cities please!!!!!!!

Regards, gerard.

 

[Skindiver]

I dunno

I blacked out at 4.00 minutes one day and did 5.33 solid the next. Technique change ( no more friggin hyperventilating ) and relaxation ( psychological adjustment ) made the difference.

So I can hardly say that my chunky muscles ( innate physiology ) stopped me at 4.00 on the first day. They sure didnt shrink for the next day. I must assume my body composition did not contribute to blacking me out.

Things like blood ph, diet etc have a physiological bearing on a performance but these are variable and not included in my adress of physiology. Im considering a relative invariable like build , height, lung volume, musclature etc.

Im sure you too have blacked out or samba'd or been on the edge at a depth way less than the next days personal best ?

Did your physical body undergo a transmogrification ( including shrinking muscles ) to achieve a better performance the next day?

I think some need a scapegoat to explain why they are not achieving. The reason why they are not achieving is because they are in the part of the process where you dont achieve for a while.

The limits ( if any ) of the body ( accepted normal healthy ones that do train ) will never be found for as we find them we extend them once again.
Its the variable Psychology and variable physiology that stop us on any given day.

I think the Guiness book of records reflects the sit - up record of 2700 non - stop. Whats yours ? and could it be that you cant do even 270 because your muscles are big / small / average ? or because you are still in the process of going there ..

You will never manage to find out when your relatively finite body shape / composition, is the item letting you down in this game.

and then again what the hell do i know

Skindiver

 

[DeepThought]

I see body and mind as two endings of one spectrum.
Some will use the mind to affect to body, some will do the opposite.

Our maximum potential is a riddle to me, in ANY area, physical, metaphysical and psychological, be the result external or internal.

Since we are all so different from eachother, I don't rule out the possibilty that there is more than one way to achieve a certain target.

Not much, but that's my couple of sheckels.

 

[gerard]

Yeap

we can apply to sport what some people are able to do in science or arts, i.e. Mozart, Galileo, etc.

As we only use 10% of our brain potential why not try unlocking that hidden potential in freediving. Nope, some exercise physiologists may say, it goes against science and physiology; it's virtually impossible.

I say like others: everything in life (and science) is RELATIVE like the structure of our known Universe, so why don't apply the same to freediving. It's relative that we are limited by known physical functions, why don't we take a step further and do what some yogis are able to do (if its true what I say, which I think it was)
:hmm


Take care, gerard.