Your Training Is Wrong And Here's The Proof... Dr. Stephen Seiler On "No Pain No Gain" Dogma.

[@773p]

Just learned this a few months back & I’m convinced keep spreading the word

[@HowToTrain]

What discipline are you in?

[@balbibou]

Pro athletes also have nutritionists, coaches, physiotherapists and so on. Basically a full team of people to help you perform better in your sport so you don't even have to think about that. If you are an amateur just listen and look to your body (which takes a lot of experience and practice) and you'll be fine. And stay Zen no matter what.

[@antoine.-]

Yet another banger

[@glomr]

really good presentation. what would be interesting to know is their training split going from beginner - amateur - intermediate - professional level. At a professional level the progression is completely different compared to a beginner's level. Wouldn't you want to evaluate the risk vs return between increasing the workload and the risk of getting injured? It is also different for an elite athelete being in the red zone compared to an amateur as the work required to achieve the zones would be completely different. What I'm getting at is that a professional athlete has little progression to gain due to genetic limitations and would rather train to stay injury free while having a training program designed to progressively overload/plateu/peak perform during on season competitions, while a beginner would have a different outlook progression wise. that "different progression" would be interesting to map vs type of periodisation across different "athlete levels". My background is from strength training, and elite athletes use almost the exact type of periodisation going up to competition. However, instead of using % HR zones, we use % of 1 RM. Interesteing parallels nonetheless.

[@makemyday5888]

I think it's time for Pavel Tsatsouline's teachings on this channel

[@DavidKnowles]

Sorry, but music is really distracting.

[@schmo9425]

3:43

[@rajunaidu7751]

going hard improves power but training for volume is better for long term results.

[@theelement6255]

Some Olympic weightlifters might beg to differ

[@rajunaidu7751]

@@theelement6255 Eastern Bloc lifting programs are the best

[@theelement6255]

raju naidu you ain’t lying. The soviets and the Chinese really get it. Great numbers, great physiques

[@rajunaidu7751]

@@theelement6255 I'm always right lol

[@johnfreeman7159]

This is the truth. Why the cheesy piano music though? Please remove!

[@luisdebest11]

What about body-building? What if I want to gain 20 pounds of muscle in 12 months? This is very hard to do if you stay in the green zone for eight out of every ten workout sessions. Please explain.

[@bluemystic7501]

Body building is not an endurance sport but some of the same principles apply.

[@jacklauren9359]

Train consistently and get on the gear. Plain and simple.

[@axelpalacios9232]

You miss understand, you added a time frame, their training sessions are not like bodybuilding, they get stronger slower but they get there

[@theelement6255]

Take off the time limit. That’ll hurt you. Also, according to many of the old school guys AND present day science, volume is key. Well, if you want more volume, simply do these lighter sessions, more often and you will see more muscle at a faster rate.

[@MatheusSorge]

They dont performe a lot of time in the high intensity zone because its impossible. Simple as that. Its not because high intensity give less result. They give more or at least the same results compared with low intensity-high volume with less time of training, simple because its harder and impossible to do for 2,3 hours and every day. Its just to know how do periodize to not overtrain. Walk 20km every day and you will be a top maratonist... ok...

[@stevenmoore8943]

Great information, LOSE the Mr. Rogers piano !