The 5 most common training program myths Plan your training sessions, but forget these rules

You will find a lot of "rules" for planning your training program on the internet and elsewhere. The problem, however, is that many of these are not real rules. They are just myths and misconceptions. Here are the top 5:

1 - A good training program is a balanced program

This may sound reasonable at first glance, but it's actually not true. A good training program is not about balance. It's about addressing individual needs and achieving your personal goals. So your training should be unbalanced to some degree so that you can devote more of your training to the areas you need to develop the most.

Scientific research shows that there is a dose-dependent response when it comes to gains in muscle mass and strength. So it's a mistake to use a balanced training program that devotes roughly the same amount of exercises, total sets and reps and training days to both your weaker, less developed muscle groups and your stronger, more developed muscle groups.

If your goal is to be somewhat skilled and capable at everything, rather than excelling at one or two things, then balance might be best for you. However, it's not best for everyone.

2 - Prioritize training for the core

Many trainers prioritize core training regardless of their goals. A 2015 meta-analysis (a study of studies) looked at the link between core muscle strength, physical fitness, athletic performance and the effects of core training on these parameters in trained individuals. The results were as follows:

• Core muscle strength plays only a minor role in trained individuals in terms of physical fitness and athletic performance."
• Core muscle strength appears to be an effective means of increasing core muscle strength and was associated with only limited improvements in markers of physical fitness and athletic performance compared to no training or regular training."

Of course, this doesn't mean that the core isn't an important part of the body that needs to be trained. But it does mean that the performance benefits of targeted core training are often misunderstood or overestimated. It also means that there is no need to view core training as a universal aspect of program planning that requires special attention.

3 - Master the basics

When people talk about sticking to the basics, they have a list of specific exercises that they believe are fundamental. Let's take a closer look at this.

The word "foundational" refers to an underlying basis or principle - something that is fundamental. When this definition is applied to the design of a training program, it becomes clear that there are no fundamental exercises that must be used.

There are only fundamental training principles such as overload, specificity, individuality, etc. that must be practiced. And it is these principles that dictate the exercises that should be incorporated into a training program and how they should be applied in a comprehensive training program. In other words, exercises are simply methods that allow us to apply principles.

Many will label a training program as either "good" or "bad" based on whether or not it includes a certain group of exercises that they call the basics. This is a classic case of putting methods before principles. However, when it comes to good program design, we don't start with the methods, we start with the principles. So a good training program is not determined by the exercises it includes, but by how training principles are used.

Some trainers will even go a step further and say that a successful program is all about mastering the basics, which in other words means that good training involves mastering certain exercises. This is also incorrect.

Unless you are trying to become a powerlifter or Olympic weightlifter, there is no single exercise that you are required to train. When it comes to performing exercises like deadlifts, you only need to use them in a way that is safe and helps you increase your body-wide strength or muscle growth. You need to have a basic competence in the exercises you perform, but it is not necessary to learn or train powerlifting specific skills that are required to become a deadlift master.

As far as exercises are concerned, there is no such thing as basic exercises. There are only traditional and non-traditional exercises. What we have are basic human actions such as pushing, pulling, rotation, locomotion and plane changes, for which there are many conventional and unconventional exercise applications you can choose from to train these universal human actions.

For example, the basic human action of squatting falls under the heading of plane change. In other words, squats are one of many other ways of performing the action of changing plane.

The reason it's important to consider basic human actions separately from conventional exercises is that when we think of an exercise like squats, we usually think of how we move when we have a barbell on our back (or in front of our body). And if we think that this type of squat represents a basic human action that everyone should be able to perform, then we are looking to square the circle. And not everyone is built in such a way that squats performed in this way are ideal for them.

However, if we recognize that the conventional style of performing squats is merely a way to train the fundamental human action of changing plane, then we are not elevating squats or any other specific exercise to a pedestal. We know that there are numerous other ways to train plane changes that may better suit an individual based on bone structure, body proportions and injury history.

This is why it's ridiculous for trainers to say, "You just don't know how to teach someone these exercises." As if everyone can be trained regardless of their individual bone structure, individual body proportions and injury history. This is the perfect example of coaches trying to fit exercisers to exercises instead of exercises to exercisers.

Ultimately it boils down to this: are you using the exercise or is the exercise using you? Considering the natural variations between different people's bodies, just because some exercisers can do conventional squats or deadlifts, it doesn't make sense to tell people that everyone should be able to perform these exercises in the same way. Sure, you can force people to try it, but a much smarter approach is to select exercises based on a trainee's needs.

4 - It's all about pushing yourself on the heavy basic exercises

Unless you're a powerlifter, it doesn't really matter how much weight you can move. Exercisers who aren't weightlifters don't strive to move specific amounts of weight - they strive to progress.

Doing this doesn't mean moving a specific amount of weight that would impress the powerlifting community. It just means getting stronger than before without sacrificing your health or your physical capacity to participate in other activities or sports you like.

When it comes to building muscle mass (hypertrophy), progress is not judged by how much weight you can move - it's about the way you perform the exercises and the changes you make to your body as a result. These are the effects that are visible outside the gym.

There is a big difference between using numbers as a metric for progress and aiming for certain weights on certain exercises. Of course, you can't increase weight or reps without using numbers as a measure of progress to try to perform slightly better each week than the previous week. You see progress when you can either increase the weight while using the same number of repetitions or when you can perform more repetitions with the same weight.

Since the human body adapts to new demands, you will only get so far with the principle of progressive overload. This is the reason that everyone will eventually reach a plateau in a training program where it is no longer possible to continue to achieve progressive overload using the same exercises. This is where variety comes into play and you change the exercises used.

This is very different from chasing specific weights in certain exercises, which brings us back to the problem of trying to force yourself into a mold and perform certain exercises.

There was a study done in 2009 with professional football players that looked at the relationship between maximal strength in squats (up to a 70 degree knee angle, which is deeper than squats with thighs parallel to the ground) and 5, 10 and 40 yard sprints. This study found that athletes with a 1RM squat/body mass ratio above 2.1 were significantly faster at 10 and 40 yard sprints than athletes with a 1RM squat/body mass ratio below 1.9.

Some will probably now want to use this study as evidence that all athletes should not only train squats, but should also strive for maximal weights in this exercise to reach at least the standard of double bodyweight in squats.

However, the results of another study comparing unilateral (single leg) versus bilateral (both legs) squat training for strength, sprinting and agility in rugby players showed that Bulgarian split squats were as effective as classic squats in improving lower body strength, 40 meter speed and changes in direction.

Another study found that single leg training and leg training performed with both legs increased strength and reduced fatigue, with no differences between the results of single leg and leg training performed with both legs.

Interestingly, this study also found that single-leg training did not reduce fatigue during repeated maximal contractions with both legs, and training performed with both legs did not reduce fatigue during single-leg repeated maximal contractions.

In other words, these results show not only that improvements in strength are similar with bilateral and unilateral squat training, but also that unilateral training does not reduce bilateral fatigue and vice versa.

Sure, squats are a great way to increase strength, but they're not the only way to do it. You don't even need a study to know this. When we apply training principles, you realize that no specific exercise has magical powers. You realize the reality that all resistance training exercises are simply a way to apply force through joints and generate progressive overload.

5 - Exercise progression represents training success

Many trainers use exercise progression and regression models like the example sequence below, which comes from the NSCA'S Foundations Of Fitness Programming Manual that I worked on:

Exercise: Squats

• Regression 1 - Wall Sit(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-wV4Venusw)
• Regression 2 - Goblet Squats
• Standard - Classic Squats
• Progression 1 - Front squats
• Progression 2 - Squats with the bar above the head

Exercise: Press (external load)

• Regression 1 - Chest press on the machine
• Regression 2 - Barbell bench press
• Standard - dumbbell bench press
• Progression 1 - one-arm dumbbell bench press
• Progression 2 - one-arm cable press(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKp6gYXk_pU)

Progression and regression schemes like these can be helpful when used as a systematic way to build familiarity with a given exercise before performing more complex variations of that exercise. It makes sense to learn an easier exercise before a more difficult one.

However, problems arise when these types of exercise progression and regression models are used as a general program goal. Why? Because some people are not physically built to perform certain exercises like overhead barbell squats. Making a program a goal is the same as trying to fit individuals to specific exercises instead of fitting exercises to individuals.

Furthermore, if you think that you need to continually add complexity to a given exercise in order to progress in your training, what are you going to do when you are able to perform every conceivable variation at the top end of the progression model? And if you are able to perform an exercise that is at a higher level in the progression model, does this mean that you can no longer benefit from using a variation that is at a lower level?

No, this is absurd. Any exercise, regardless of how simple it is, can be used progressively by increasing the weight, the number of repetitions, the number of sets, the time under tension, or whatever. So you can make the simplest variation very heavy by using a heavier weight and doing more repetitions.

Certainly these models can be helpful in teaching people how to perform certain exercises, but a person who can perform any exercise, no matter how advanced, can still benefit from a simpler variation. You will continue to benefit as long as the weight is appropriate for your current level of strength.

Even the fittest athletes can use and benefit from level 1 exercises, which is why these exercises should not be considered beginner exercises. All these progression models mean is that if someone is able to correctly perform an exercise higher up the scale, that person will be able to demonstrate good technique on a wider range of exercises. For this reason, such a person can use a wider range of exercises as part of their training sessions.

References

1. Schoenfeld BJ, Ogborn D, Krieger JW. Effects of Resistance Training Frequency on Measures of Muscle Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Sports Med. 2016 Nov;46(11):1689-1697.
2. Schoenfeld BJ, Ogborn D, Krieger JW. Dose-response relationship between weekly resistance training volume and increases in muscle mass: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Sports Sci. 2016 Jul 19:1-10 [Epub ahead of print]
3. Prieske O, et al.The Role of Trunk Muscle Strength for Physical Fitness and Athletic Performance in Trained Individuals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Sports Med. 2016 Mar;46(3):401-19.
4. Juan Carlos "JC" Santana. Functional Training. Human Kinetics Publishing. 2016. pg.13-2
5. McBride JM, Blow D, Kirby TJ, Haines TL, Dayne AM, Triplett NT. Relationship between maximal squat strength and five, ten, and forty yard sprint times. J Strength Cond Res. 2009 Sep;23(6):1633-6.
6. Speirs, Derrick et al. Unilateral vs. Bilateral Squat Training for Strength, Sprints, and Agility in Academy Rugby Players. J. Strength Cond Res. Feb 2016. vol. 30, issue 2. p386-92
7. Rube, N, and Secher, NH. Effect of training on central factors in fatigue follows two- and one-leg static exercise in man. Acta Physiologica Scandinavica 141(1): 87-95, 1991
8. Ramsey Nijem, Single-Leg and Double-Leg Training Implications for Basketball. Taken from the NSCA website
9. Clayton, N, Drake, J, Larkin, S, Linkul, R, Martino, M, Nutting, M, and Tumminello, N. Foundations of Fitness Programming. National Strength and Conditioning Association, 2015.

Source: https://www.t-nation.com/training/the-5-most-common-programming-myths

By Nick Tumminello