In
an effort to bring Racer X Online readers the best information available regarding
MX fitness, postings on this website are open to anyone with a specific and
proven expertise in the fitness field. I came across one such person as I was
surfing the net one day for MX-related fitness articles. Normally, when I visit
so-called MX fitness websites, I am greeted with the same old stuff: outdated
articles, files that don’t load, poor writing skills, and testimonials
about guys they trained in the early '90s. Steven Bubel’s website is none
of that and a whole lot more, and according to the bio page, he has more degrees
than a thermometer. That’s nothing new, but what is new and refreshing
is that Steve is good at getting his thoughts from his head to the paper, a
rare gift. His training expertise is based not only on real-world experience
but, more importantly, on cutting-edge scientific research.
Virtual Trainer contacted Steve and he agreed to work on a few articles with
us. Look for more articles from Steve in the future, but until then, be sure
and check out his website at www.mxconditioning.com.
This is part two of his series on Training the Female Athlete.
 | | Aubriana Dunn | |
| In Part I of this
series, we challenged the notion of the fat-burning zone, widely touted as the
optimum exercise intensity for maximizing fat loss. It was firmly established
that, not only is the prescription misleading, it's practically useless for
individuals training for the extreme physical demands of motocross.
Although it has unnecessarily
biased a generation of exercisers against intense cardiovascular exercise, given
the scope of the research upon which it is based, it is understandable how such
conclusions were drawn. Part II, on the other hand, looks at another popular
myth that is based on nothing more than anecdote and unsubstantiated rumor.
Myth #2: Lifting
heavy weights will make you big and bulky
The idea that women
who lift heavy weights will develop the same degree of muscularity as men violates
basic physiology. Still, it remains the most common fear among female trainees
beginning a resistance training program. Where this idea originated is unknown,
but I speculate that someone, somewhere, witnessed a drug-using female
athlete lifting weights (most likely a bodybuilder) and drew their erroneous
conclusion. It wasn't long before the media popularized this as fact, coining
words such as "toning" and "sculpting" and frightening women
into an exercise world of step aerobics and light-weight, high-repetition weight
training.
Unfortunately, the
female athlete is no less susceptible to this bias. Here is a quote from a recent
interview with Sarah Whitmore: "... when I do lift weights, I use really
light weights and high reps. But it stinks because I look kind of funny when
I’m at the gym lifting five-pound weights....” Five-pound weights!
How is someone going to get stronger using five-pound weights? I mention this
not to single her out, but to make the point of how pervasive this thinking
has become.
 | | Tania Satchwell | |
| Lost in all this
misinformation is the FACT that the degree of hypertrophy (i.e. muscle growth)
seen in female bodybuilders is possible only through the use of anabolic steroids
(i.e. testosterone). Testosterone is one of the primary anabolic (i.e. growth
promoting) hormones believed to be involved in the synthesis of new muscle tissue.
Men have it in abundance - nearly 10 times that of the average woman - which
results in the development of greater muscle
size and strength both inherently
and with training. On average, untrained women are estimated to
be 24 percent muscle (men are 40 percent) and have approximately half of the
upper- and approximately two thirds of the lower-body strength of men. This
disparity obviously places the female athlete at a tremendous disadvantage.
The beautiful thing
is that, despite lower absolute strength levels, research has shown that
women experience the same relative increases in strength following training.
In other words, while women may never be as strong as their male weight-training
counterparts, they typically see an identical percentage increase from training.
For example, let's
say that at the start of a training program Subject 1 (male) can bench press
150 pounds and Subject 2 (female) can bench press 75 pounds. Subject 1 has an
absolute strength advantage twice that of Subject 2 (150 = 2 x 75). After several
weeks of training, Subject 1 can now bench press 165 pounds and Subject 2 can
now bench press 82.5 pounds. Subject 2 is still not as strong as Subject 1 but
both experienced a 10 percent gain from training.
To allay your fears,
these early increases in strength (first 6-8 weeks) are not accomplished by
increasing muscle mass but rather by adaptations within the nervous system -
primarily through improvements in coordination within and between muscles. In
essence, trainees get better at recruiting existing muscle fiber. Only later
does a strength increase arise from muscle hypertrophy and, even then, the onset
and degree varies with the complexity of the exercises, the structure of the
workouts and, as we've already discussed, gender.
Exercise Selection
 | | Tara Gieger | |
| Complex resistance
exercises, such as those involving movement at more than one joint (i.e. the
leg press), typically involve a longer neural adaptation phase compared with
simpler single-joint exercises (i.e. the leg extension). This extended learning
period can delay hypertrophy by several months. Furthermore, training three-dimensionally
with free-weights (i.e. the squat) demands even greater coordination between
the stabilizing musculature and prime movers delaying the necessity for hypertrophy
even further.
Workout Structure
An infinite number
of strength-training programs can be designed by manipulating these variables:
*1RM
(one-repetition maximum) refers to the amount of weight that can be lifted only
once for a given exercise.
Programs designed
to induce muscle hypertrophy traditionally rely heavily on machines to isolate
muscle groups, utilize more than one exercise to target the same muscle group
in a given session, use 3 to 4 sets of 8 to 12 repetitions per exercise at approximately
60-75 percent 1RM, and prescribe short rest periods of one to two minutes between
sets.
Programs designed
for maximal strength, on the other hand, emphasize free-weights, focus on movements
rather than muscles, utilize fewer exercises, use 5 to 10 sets of 1 to 5 repetitions
at approximately 75-100 percent 1RM, with long rest periods of two to five minutes
between sets.
 | | Sarah Whitmore | |
| By comparison, the
typical weight-training routines employed by most women usually include 2 to
3 sets of 15 to 20 repetitions at 50 percent 1RM or less. More often than not,
they include a mixture of free-weight and machine-based exercises, often in
circuit-type fashion. Circuits are a collection of exercises performed in succession
with little or no rest between them. While not an ideal method for building
strength, circuit training does a good job of developing muscular and cardiovascular
endurance.
Taken together, you
can see that, contrary to popular belief, the program that maximizes muscle
size does not necessarily employ the heaviest weights. Rather, hypertrophy-oriented
programs maximize the amount of work done which, in turn, maximizes the amount
of protein degraded (i.e. broken down) in a given workout. The greater the amount
of protein broken down, the greater the amount of protein resynthesized.
Protein Breakdown
and Protein Synthesis
According to popular
theory, what determines whether a muscle "grows" is the total amount
of muscle that is broken down during a workout. This is a function of both the
rate of protein breakdown and the total
weight lifted. The rate of protein breakdown is determined by the load
(i.e. the heavier the weight, the higher the rate of protein degradation) whereas,
total weight lifted is calculated by multiplying sets x reps x weight.
Granted, while the
rate of protein breakdown is high when training heavy, the total weight lifted
is usually small due to the fewer number of repetitions performed. The opposite
is true when using very light loads (>20 reps). The total weight lifted is
high but, given the low resistance, the rate of protein breakdown is low. However,
when training with moderate loads (8-12 reps) the rate of breakdown is average,
the mechanical work is average, but taken together they result in a large amount
of degraded protein. Given adequate rest and proper nutrition, such a program
will yield the greatest amount of muscle gain.
Practical Application
Based on the above
theory, we can now see why high-repetition resistance training minimizes the
possibility of inducing muscle hypertrophy. Unfortunately, given the relatively
light loads, these same programs also minimize gains in strength - a quality
underdeveloped yet so vital to the female athlete.
So, what's a girl
to do?
-
Concentrate on complex, multi-joint movements
(i.e. squat, deadlift, bench press, pullups, etc.)
-
Don't be afraid
to lift heavy (75-100 percent 1RM)
-
Keep the circuits
-
Ditch the machines
One of my preferred
methods is to begin a training session with one or more compound movements and
finish with a full-body circuit. Use your imagination.
On a final note,
studies have shown that combining both strength and endurance training in a
given program diminishes the hypertrophy response observed when performing strength
training alone. As most motocross athletes engage in some form of endurance
training (as they should), you can feel safe knowing that your chances of getting
big and bulky are slim.
Good luck with
your training and as always, VT can be reached anytime at crytset@comcast.net.
In addition, be sure and check out the Racer X archives
section, your complete one-stop information zone for motocross fitness. Archives
before November, 2005 can be found here. |