Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #1 
As we  have now some great people working in the field of strength    with MOXY   we  will hopefully see an increase in discussion  from this user groups as well.  I like to throw  as so often  some critical questions into the discussion.
  1. In  endurance  ' Zoning" ideas we  classical used  a "test " system  like  Maximal HR  , or Maximal VO2  or maximal speed  and so on. ( other options  as well ). Now we  decide, that this " maximal" is 100 %  and    from now on we base the zoning on a  calculated  percentage, which than suppose to work  for all people the same, stimulate the same physiological responds  and is  indefinitely repeatable  till we  make another maximal test, no matter how  and what we did a  day before  or what happens   on the day of the workout.
So if we  put it that extreme  n presentation people    always agree, that this is not the case. We know that  2  athletes  with the same maximal VO2  max    do not  have  as well the same 70 %   result or   metabolic  respond. It is accepted  and recognized, but nevertheless we  do not change  ( YET)
 Why, because we had no other means   to find in an easy way a  individual  assessment tool during a workout. Now  we can  as we discuss  since a long time here  as well as on other forums.
.
 Now What does this has to  do with strenght.
 Well we use mOXY  as well in strength workouts  to try to  replace  our  old idea,  that a 1 maximal  Rep  load in a   strength workout    can be used  to find the %  of  the    workouts we plan.
 Same here , we know that some athletes  by 60 % load of their  1  max rep  can do  many more  reps  than other athletes.
 Why. because like in  endurance  , we as well have in strength a question of  energy supply  and demand. The supply may have to be split in  actual supply over  potential  delivery  and actual  supply  from storage area  due to lack of delivery.
 So to start out here our three intensity option we  may use  for workouts.
 a) Strength workout  , where the contraction force is on a level where we  still have   delivery and  utilization  going as well as   exhaust is  working ( outflow )
 b) the next heavier load is , where we  create  a contraction strength, where  delivery is still working but exhaust is   now compromised (  venous occlusion  strength.)
 c)  we have a  contraction strength , where    delivery  and exhaust is   compromised  ( arterial occlusion   and as  such we    have a different reason of terminating the  performance.
 So  the question is:
 in a/b/ and c/  we will have different reasons  why we may run  into trouble  on maintaining the   chosen performance. What are  the potential reasons.
.
  In case of  an increase in discussion here we  have many case studies looking   to compare  MOXY SmO2  and tHb  with classical   feedback options like SEMG  as well as invasive blood testing  to confirm  what we  may see with MOXY  to what we  actually can test  with  other options.
 Will be  fun to lock into a  involvement on here by strength trainers.
Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #2 
We have  some great movement here on strength  due to some case studies  roger  showed  in this strength section.
 This allows me to ask some questions  as a critical  discussion   point. Here some thoughts. :
  I love the section in one of the case studies, where there was a healthy critical view on the equipment itself  and  the  ability of the equipment  to  be compares   in between different numbers of MOXY we may  use on a client. This is what we need  some critical skeptical but open minded  brains  so we can go forward in the different options we use since many years MOXY but the   big group of personal trainers  and strength coaches    have not yet seen the  options .
 So here the great part of  critical view  from  the case study  I talked about.

"

Conclusion:

            After testing and thoroughly going through the results it’s quite conclusive that both sensors were reading very close to each other, so close that no numerical difference could be seen during exercise sensor switching in both SmO2 andtHb readings. When the sensors where switched the values remained the same on that particular leg. For example when sensor #276 went from left VL to right VL it gave the same reading as sensor #288 when it was on the right VL. This result happened on all 3 exercises and there switches showing Moxy’sinter sensor consistency.  Now feeling very confident in Moxy’s ability to read accurately between sensors I’m eager to see what more in depth information Moxy can tell me as to why I have a left handed right footed female test subject, off to case study # 3.

So as we have a nice case here  nicely done out of individual skepticism  I like to add some  more ideas  to here  with some critical questions :

:

One of the biggest areas that can substantiate Moxy or prove its ineffectiveness for hypertrophy and strength/power is in the area of physiology/biochemistry. Oxygen use within the muscle cells has never been thought of as having any relevant role in weight resistance training as this type of training is known to be fueled anaerobically. Moxy actually shows that oxygen is used, however the questions that need to be answered are to what extent is that oxygen used?"

 This statement  means , that we look at  what we all learned  and still see in every single  book.

energy.gif 

 So after we had a  critical look at MOXY  and a fair testing  my question is a critical  look at what we learned.
 I like to get some feedback from anybody on the above  theory on muscle energy  use  and   hope to get the relevant  scientific papers  showing the   biochemistry  ,  and studies   documenting the idea  of the model including the lab studies as i  still look for them  since  a very long time.

 So   to all the coaches  who are surprised  and critical;a look why NIRS  shows  an immediate drop in SmO2  as an indication , that O2  is involved immediately  and very nicely in strength and interval workouts, please try to explain how this can happen  , so either NIRS is wrong or the theory  may have to be reviewed, but  where is the critical  case study  who shows that the theory is right  and why do we   still  simply repeat what the theory shows.
.
 So I like to  get a small challenge going here.
  and hope  for some great and fair  feedback , even though we may  not always agree   as  the classical ideas  may have  some needs  in reviewing them.
 So let's start here.  An old case study done  10 years back and now repeated  with MOXY  as now everybody can afford  it. We used original the great tool Portamon from Artinis. ( Netherland ) Here the  same  idea  repeated    with MOXY.
  For lactate users  and 1  Max rep   calculator  as well as  for Heart rate users. the initial question. . What can you tell us  from this initial feedback. Please  disregard the back ground  MOXY ( NIRS ) traces  and simply argue  from lactate, HR  and potential %  of the max  1  Rep option  ?

4 squat 1 pp.jpg 





Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #3 
I got  a nice  (  well not really that nice )  email  from a well know strength trainer.
 He  writes in short, that it is impossible to create a occlusion ( arterial occlusion  with    strength workout  and that we have to  take a   band to really create a complete  occlusion.
  Well  may be.
 The idea with the band  will work for sure but it may be  help full  to check what you may   create on  SmO2  reactions  in individual people , before simply making a cookbook  for   athletes to use  occlusion workouts.
. Now  can we do it  without the    help of a band ??
 Well  accordingly to the expert  of the mail not.
 According to some very old studies   by Rhomert we  can.

blut geafeass und muskel contraction.jpg

True the  study is very old.
 But not as old  as the idea, that we  do not use  O2  in strength workouts. ( Smile ) or that lactate is the reason of fatigue.

 Now they are   much newer  studies   and  on is a very nice one looking at occlusion    with and without    help. And  surprisingly   even with   put band  we can create  an occlusion.
tension an dholding time.jpg

So I like mails  and I like fair challenges. Here once more the question to  coaches  and strenght trainers.
 What can we   give on feedback  based on lactate and HR  reactions in a workout like this 4 squatting. 4 squat 1 pp.jpg 
 so in a closer look   4  red circles.
4 squat 2 pp.jpg

Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #4 
Not yet  any nice feedback on  what to do  with lactate and HR values  for a strength workout.
In fact I will show later, how the lactate value s can be used  for specific  stimulation on MCT 1  and MCT 4  ,  but  not  as a  guide   or quality information on strength.
The lactate values are directly depending on the   H +  balance  and H + balance is directly  related to the  respiration and the CO2  release. As  such   this means  we   have to  keep in mind the  O2  Dissociation curve.
 I will show    hopefully  this week , depending on feed backs some  interesting case  studies  we  did   with  The seminar  group   at the Red Bull head quarter in Santa Monica.
 So lets' stay on here and   go somewhat deeper in the above challenge.
4 squat 2 pp.jpg
 Let's look the first  squatting. Keep in mind that all 4 loads  where the same  weight , just different  ideas on how  to do the squatting  .Sop same   performance but very different outcomes in physiological demand  and reactions and therefor  most likley  end result   of the training stimulation's.

4 squat 3 pp.jpg

4 squat 4 pp.jpg

Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #5 
Where we  able to  read out   similar feed backs  from the HR  and or lactate. If yes  how  and why ?
  Here the second    load in a closer view.
4 squat 5 pp.jpg

Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #6 

Okay just got an email in.  Blue  circle  and the question of the respiratory reason for this action/

 yes. good point  and yes  give it some thoughts  as the answer is  explain many times on the forum.  .
 

Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #7 
Thanks  fro mail but again come please and ask on the forum. If you do not like to give your name  make  one up. The question/ discussion was.
 Can we easily see the difference between a  great trained strength athletes and a weaker athlete.
 Well this is what  the RIP and the SIP is all about, finding weakness and compensation and than use this  for individual workout  plans.
 Here an example of 2 very different strength reactions. Look at the  graphs  and you can see the difference  and as you are getting better in reading the combination  of SmO2  and  tHb  you can  make a  very nice conclusion  out of it.

D   thb  and smo2  strenght.jpg


And here the second  case
J 3 sets thb smo2.jpg


And here  SmO2  compared
compa J and D red l.jpg 

Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #8 
Here the third squat in our  discussion  n how  MOXY  can  gives us  quality feedback. Still same performance  ( weight )  just different  ideas on how the squatting is done.
4 squat 6pp.jpg

Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #9 
I like to throw this in here.
 This   was some home work  for some of my grade 11 student    who come in for job shadowing.
 Short interpretation for  MOXY data  Have fun    to try the  same.

3  biceps  contraction.jpg 

This is a screen shot from the exercise live from the peripedal software.



Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #10 
Okay , here the last  set of  our  short discussion on squatting with the same weight  and  reactions we may see  using MOXY  compared  to lactate and HR reactions.

4 squat 7pp.jpg

Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #11 
This is a feedback to post 11.11  985. Summary . 2 athletes  a) a very strong  great endurance  athlete  cyclist the other a  less endurance trained  but strength trained athlete.
 The interesting part is the SmO2  first after the three sets of  squatting.
 You can see that the strength athlete  has  an incredible  nice  picture  of three nearly identical SmO2  reactions  form  drop of SmO2  to reloading back  to base line. In comparison to the endurance athlete.
 The reason why I  like this discussion is, as we have  an internal discussion on the ability to  see  the difference between endurance athletes  ( high Mitochondria volumina  and  non endurance athletes or perhaps   ice hockey players, which are considered not really endurance athletes.
 Now PERHAPS:  Ice hockey player  may be endurance athletes  when we take Harres idea  of  endurance  the ability to resist  fatigue  or endurance as the ability to recover fast.
There  are  studies out  from 1994  Mc Cully Kevin, which  are done as we  do it but than newer studies  show, that  we may have to   get an arterial occlusion going to do any potential comment on mitochondria density. Reason: They need a stable tHb or at least  with the equipment they used.

In our simple case study the endurance athlete  clearly has a less optimal recovery but look at the tHb reaction  and  what happened  with him during the load compared  with the   strength athlete  and later we  can look as well at the respiration  and as  such at the influence of respiration on the O2 disscurve.
. Under occlusion , so  no inflow and no outflow the O2  disscurve  has very little influence  as  such or at least only into one direction ???




Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

HTML hit counter - Quick-counter.net