Love what you're saying from a Discipline and Conditioning point of view Goo, but I know that if I had of trained "smarter instead harder" I would be a lot stronger and bigger, which I think is the point @
spartacus is getting at. I remember Tuesday mornings were always a bitch for me. If I had of adjusted things a bit instead of "bulldogging" through I may be a lot bigger and stronger today, rather than a bit injury wracked.
But yeah, for the average "Tom, Dick and Mary" you gotta stay on program otherwise you're forever skipping workouts.
yes, at least from my experience, it is a mistake to go flat out even if just one flat out session each week, as I am doing now.
it has never worked for me. after a hard session, I need to drop intensity right down for a couple of weeks.
lately, doing one hard leg session per week, I have gone backwards quickly as measured by my power output.
so, I am going back to what seems like an easy session, 3 sets of 8 reps on about 60% with 1 minute rest for most exercises. this is the training intensity that works for me, and helps avoid injuries and staleness and so on.
for others, that percentage may be too light, but with short rests and good form you would be surprised how hard the final set is.
again, many ways to train.
i have trained this way since my best bench press was 80kg for 1 rep after reading a lot in early 1980s.
For example, Michael Yessis, an expert of Soviet Union strength training which had long dominated the heavier divisions of Olympic weightlifting, argued in 1992 that “weights should be light to medium for a steady increase in growth of muscle fibres and strength. (Using weights that are) Too heavy, decreases volume and in preparation period leads to incomplete muscle development. Too much weight changes the way the exercise is executed” (Michael Yessis,
Fitness and Sports Review USA, Vol. 27, No. 4, Aug 1992).