Originally Posted by Dan Fanelli
I agree with everything said. But ive been told that I should basically never have a client do the same workout twice. I would agree basically with this statement, in that they need to progress in some way, but it was stated to me more that they shouldn't do the same exercises or sequence of exercises twice.
From what I can see so far, there is this belief that variety is the most important variable. Whereas I believe that progressive overload is the most important variable. And I feel that if you are constantly trying to change things as often as possible and create novelty in your programs, its very hard to monitor progression. It is important to keep the body guessing, but really how much is necessary?
For example, I might have an A-B split that I would do with a client. It would be full body during both sessions, but all different exercises. Also, the set/rep range would change each session. There may be very minor changes to the exercises, but I think if you change from a db chest press, to a barbell chest press, to a band press all in the course of 1-2 weeks, that you dont get enought time to tell whether your progressing or not. I would like to be able to have a client follow something like the above A-B split for 2-3 weeks, which would be each workout 3-5 times. At which point, I could evaluate progress and decide whether to make a large change to the program or just some minor tweaks. Otherwise, if this is not accepted, then i'd be tempted to put a client on two programs at once, and alternate programs with each session. So it might be A1, B2, A2, B1, A1..... And the program would go twice as long. I dunno, this just seems silly to me.
I guess this is just a side of the business im going to have to get used to. The way I kind of see it, is that athletes are able to get in incredible shape with the basic exercises and minor modifications. Why does the personal training industry have this notion that basic exercises will get basic results?
|