High Frequency Powerlifting
The Pros And Cons Of Increasing Training
My View
I am not a huge fan of higher frequency training.
The reason is not because I think it doesn’t work, it does, compared to training 3 x per week, training 6 x per week yields 5-7% greater gains in strength, which is huge for a competitive Powerlifter. But more the fact that to execute it you need a large amount of time and extra training days added to the week and this is usually not too practical for the majority of lifters (especially the ones I would currently coach). But the evidence is quite clear that the impact of higher frequencies of training has on maximal strength development.
There are some famous examples in the past when you look through the history of strength training.
Bulgarian Training System
“if in doubt, max out”
Ivan Adebejiav the head coach of the Bulgarian weightlifting team would have taken high frequency training more mainstream with the approach of training 2-3 times per day over 6 days a week. The approach is still considered to be extreme with the philosophy of training towards daily maxes on a small number of the weightlifting movements (snatch, clean, clean and jerk, jerk and front squat).
The programme is notorious for high attrition rates and athletes needing to survive the programme to see its true potential.
A totally made up quote that aligns with the method “if in doubt, max out” sums it up nicely.
Norwegian High Frequency Experiment
In Powerlifting the increase in popularity came when the head coach of the Norwegian powerlifting team Dietmar Wolf began introducing higher frequencies of training with the elite lifters of Norway.
As a coach with a weightlifting background he transferred the philosophies and principles into Powerlifting and had some amazing results. One notable success was the rise of Carl Yngvar Christensen who was the first IPF lifter to cross 1200kg and was the top lifter on formula (Wilks back in the day!) in the world in the early 2010’s.
In Powerlifting this approach would be so different to what had been popular before. Westside, 5/3/1 and similar programmes would have been used by the majority of lifters between 2000-2010. Sheiko templates would have been the closest thing a western Powerlifter could use that resembled anything like a higher frequency system. My experience of the people who used it were, for the most part, applying it badly, just blindly following the template with no thought of individualisation.
So what is the science behind higher frequency training?
The Science
The first thing to cover off is “what do we mean by high frequency”. There is no defined standard other than it being an increase on what you normally would do in a given training week. Bulgarian weightlifting would see 6 days and 18 sessions per week with 3 sessions per day on average. The below tables are just worked examples not direct examples. They are there to illustrate ‘how’ the work could be distributed across a week.
The Norwegian high frequency training would involve, 6 days per week, single sessions include multiple disciplines on the same day.
Volume
One of the big components of the high frequency model is the spreading of the total volume across the week.
You need to lift with the same volume (number of sets) and then spread that across the 7 day period. This allows for a very subtle but significant difference in adaptive response. Less peripheral fatigue per workout allowing for higher outputs more frequently.
I like to think of a lot of these things through the lens of the GAS model by Hans Seyle. As you apply stress (training) you dip in terms of function and the more work you do in a certain area of the body the bigger the dip (peripheral fatigue). So as the workout progresses you get more and more fatigue in the targeted muscles e.g. upper body vs lower body. The bigger the dip the longer time to full recovery and restoration of the physical capabilities.
If you spread the load across the week with more sessions this fatigue per session is lessened and the dips are smaller, so therefore easier to recover out of. This essentially allows for higher %’s or RPE’s to be used throughout the week.
Specificity
Another big variable that gets amped up is specificity, the higher frequency models tend to have a much higher emphasis on the competition movement and very close variants of the competition movement.
As mentioned previously, the volume of the sessions will be equated across the week more frequently and alongside this spreading of the load comes more opportunity to use competition variants as opposed to an isolation exercise. So every lift performed in the week will now be a much higher transfer and completed with much greater intent.
The changes would be in rate of force development, inter-muscular coordination and effectively the skill of lifting.
Upper Vs Lower Body
One of the final pieces if the distribution of lifts from upper (bench press) to lower body (squat and deadlift).
There would be a small amount of evidence that the upper body responds more favourably to higher frequencies 4 x per week than the lower body which was between 2-3 x per week. The reasoning was unclear as to why but it could be due to usage (you don’t walk on your arms) or possibly the cross sectional area and motor unit involvement for the lower limb leading to greater relative fatigue in the lower limbs.
Based on this what is there not to like regarding higher frequency training?
There are some considerations though…
The Pitfalls
Training more, if done incorrectly can lead to some issues.
I would say that 90% of lifters who see me for the Pain Free Powerlifter or Podium Program and have a pre-existing shoulder issue are training with high frequency (3-4 x per week pressing). I think this fundamentally lies in the positive benefits and the adaptation rates of different systems and tissues within the body.
Nervous System (CNS)
Muscular System (Muscle Tissue)
Passive Systems (Tendons and Connective Tissues)
Nervous System Recovery
The central nervous system can recover relatively quickly (24-36 hours) from moderate-intensity training but may require 48-72+ hours following maximal effort work. High-frequency training with excessive intensity can lead to central fatigue, decreased performance, and increased injury risk. So if intensity is too frequent you will not recover fast enough for that next big lift.
Muscular System Recovery
Muscle tissue typically requires 24-48 hours to recover from resistance training, depending on damage incurred. While protein synthesis remains elevated for 24-36 hours post-training. If volume of a specific lift in a single session exceeds the recovery threshold and you cant get out of that dip you will start seeing sign of underperformance.
Connective Tissue Recovery
This could be my favourite though, as most would not consider it as it isn’t directly related to strength. In no uncertain terms it will likely be the issue that affects the lifting and peak performance the most. This is where most high-frequency programs fail in my opinion. Tendons, ligaments, and joint capsules recover significantly slower than muscle tissue due to lower blood flow and metabolic activity. Research shows:
Tendon tissue has 7-10× slower protein turnover than muscle
Complete collagen re-modelling may take 3+ days following intense loading
Mechanical properties of tendons adapt more slowly than muscle properties
This recovery discrepancy creates a potential risk within the muscle-tendon unit during intensive training. As the nervous system can adapt very fast and increase force, followed by muscle again increasing force, the tendons and joint capsule bear a lot of that load transmission. A high frequency programme with no regard for tendon and capsule adaptations will lead to issues and injury.
Where does that leave you then?
Implementation Guidelines
To minimise these pitfalls and maximise results
Progress gradually toward higher frequencies, you are a biological organism, you earn the right to increase frequency after a good number of year adapting to specific loading. Eery system should be developed.
Vary intensity across sessions targeting the same movement pattern. The intensity of the lifts should fluctuate in line with adaptation rates.
Equate Volume, do not start your journey to higher frequency by “adding” sessions. Split the volume up across the week. Accommodate, then progress.
Monitor joint health and reduce frequency at first signs of connective tissue irritation
Periodise frequency throughout training cycles, this doesn’t have to be the way you train year round. But period of higher frequency would undoubtably be of benefit to most Powerlifters.
I hope you enjoyed today’s newsletter, if I could ask one thing, if you know anyone you think would also enjoy reading about Powerlifting and the art and science of developing maximal strength would you share today’s post. It would really help!
Thanks,
Rob