What the hell? Sets don’t matter?

Just saw this paper.

Journal of Applied Physiology

Seems to indicate that similar gains in strength as measured by increases in 1 rep max were acheieved with 2 groups, one of which did a single set at 80% 1RM to failure and a group that did 3 sets to failure.  I need to spend more time reading the paper, but I wanted to share it with others to see if others wanted to read it as well.

Here’s the money plot:

Screen Shot 2016-11-14 at 3.02.30 PM.png

Monday: 4×20′ L4 (embedded in an HM)

So, as usual for a Sunday night, I had trouble sleeping.  But I woke up before the alarm at 5:15 and headed off to work.

My standard endurance workout these days is a 4 x 20 minute session which is usually about 20km including some paddling during the rests.  So, I thought I could continue my polarized training plan by adapting my normal endurance session by just doing a 1000m or so of cool down at the end. I was thinking that I could fit other more intense sessions into the basic HM format as well, since I have the tools I need to analyze the data afterward too.  Perhaps I could call it the Polar Bear Challenge?

So today’s Plan:

  1. 4 x 20′ / 1′ paddle
  2. L4 format
  3. Power target: 10W x stroke rate
  4. Slow start at 16spm (160W)
  5. Aim for mid 190s for average power
  6. HR limit at 155


Again, with the magic of rowsandall.com, I can reslice the data into 10 minute blocks to see how accurately I hit my targets.


1 –       170 strokes, 170W
2 –       184 strokes, 184W
3-8 –  190 strokes, 190w

Workout Summary - media/20161114-135715-sled_2016-11-14T06-37-25ZEST.strokes.csv
Workout Details

So, generally 1 or 2 strokes over and a bit high on watts.

A few stroke metrics.  Power versus rate,  peak and average force versus rate and drive length versus time.

Tomorrow:  40′ erg and strength training.