Concentric,eccentric or isometric

[nico]

Hey guys, just wondering if any one can give me some advice. Im a conditioning trainer at a rugby academy and we are going into hypertrophy phase.

Just wondering if there is any difference between concentric, eccentric and isometric contraction when it comes to muscle build or do they all have simular benefits and is it best to mix them?

[tomwill]

eccentric contractions incur the most hypertrophy but i would encourage that this is mixed with a fast concentric where appropriate, so as to maintain power. avoid superslow training! something like a 3:0:1 tempo is good for standard weight training exercises.

isometrics have their place but there is little carryover (as in, strength is only developed at, and very close to, the angle at which you are working. isometrics won’t developing strength through then full ROM).

hope this helps.
cheers.

[nico]

Thank, that makes a lot of sence.

[ashley]

@nico 1312 wrote:

Hey guys, just wondering if any one can give me some advice. Im a conditioning trainer at a rugby academy and we are going into hypertrophy phase.

Just wondering if there is any difference between concentric, eccentric and isometric contraction when it comes to muscle build or do they all have simular benefits and is it best to mix them?

Personally I do not follow a traditional periodisation model but a conjugate model where all ellements of strengthare trainned concurently but certain elements highlighted for certain players at various times, as to which type of muscular contraction is best for hypertrophy, the main avenue is volume of training using a combination of concentric and eccentric methods, isometric is a more advanced method and is very useful for strength gains at sticking points in major lifts, concnetrating on the basics lifts with good technique and ensuring that the movements are performed correctly is the key for good gains in size and stength, ashley

[fergus]

I forget where I heard it first, but I think it was some reputable (otherwise I would have ignored it) German literature which suggested that all athletic S&C programs should be 70:20:10 Concentric:Eccentric:Isometric.

I think it’s a very interesting concept and there is a place for Eccentrics and Isometrics in some cases – but again it all has to be fitted into a general program.

I’m not sure if I agree that eccentrics necessarily give the most hypertrophy Tom – but perhaps you mean that increasing eccentric component and therefore TUT is useful?

[onspeed]

From another perspective – track and field athletics I agree with Ash.

We dont isolate out concentric/eccentric or isometric except in very specialist individual problems.

Likewise if you want hypertrophy you want volume.

Most modern athletic training also uses the concurrent method with emphasis on different components changing somewhat on an individual basis.

In a very simplified manner across a week – a session of high weight low reps (down to 1-3 max depending on athlete and day), mid weight explosive reps ( around 5) and low weight higher reps (8-12) works extremely well at concurrently developing power, speed and muscle mass.

We found that classic periodisation produced detraining loss in the neglected components and hence smaller overall gains per season across the gamet of needed physical attributes … example an extended period of hypertophy reps while associated with gains in mass was also associated with a loss in explosive power

[tomwill]

@fergus 1357 wrote:

I forget where I heard it first, but I think it was some reputable (otherwise I would have ignored it) German literature which suggested that all athletic S&C programs should be 70:20:10 Concentric:Eccentric:Isometric.

I think it’s a very interesting concept and there is a place for Eccentrics and Isometrics in some cases – but again it all has to be fitted into a general program.

I’m not sure if I agree that eccentrics necessarily give the most hypertrophy Tom – but perhaps you mean that increasing eccentric component and therefore TUT is useful?

fergus,
i agree with what you’re saying. in my (admittedly limited!) experience i find that people tend to rush through sets and focus on the concentric aspect of lifting and therefore miss out on sufficient TUT to stimulate muscle growth.

however the other reason i mention eccentrics is for the micro-trauma it induces and the subsequent muscle adaptation that this trauma signals. but just to be clear, i’m not advocating a hypertrophy phase in a traditional periodisation sense or a bodybuilding program: i’d include a small amount within a power-orientated, conjugate programme.

i also feel that while the ability to produce force is paramount, the ability to reduce force is often under-valued in many strength training programmes.

just my thoughts. id’ be interested to hear what you (or anyone else) thinks.

cheers!
tom

[fergus]

Ok, I think I see what you mean.
You might be referring more to force absorption? – and in this case the eccentric portion is one useful method – but it’s a more complex formula than simply extending TUT IMO – and it’s not related to micro trauma either.

[mickey67]

You are bang on Ferg !!!!!! (as always )

[tomwill]

@fergus 1379 wrote:

Ok, I think I see what you mean.
You might be referring more to force absorption? – and in this case the eccentric portion is one useful method – but it’s a more complex formula than simply extending TUT IMO – and it’s not related to micro trauma either.

I think force absoption is probably a better phrase for what i’m trying to get at!

I agree with what you’re saying in that there is far more to it (the use of eccentrics for both hypertrophy and strength) than just extending the TUT.

But my initial point was that in the pure pursuit of hypertrophy (as was asked by the OP) there are several reasons why placing a bigger emphasis on the eccentric phase can be beneficial.

[tomwill]

@fergus 1379 wrote:

Ok, I think I see what you mean.
You might be referring more to force absorption? – and in this case the eccentric portion is one useful method – but it’s a more complex formula than simply extending TUT IMO – and it’s not related to micro trauma either.

I think force absorption is probably a better phrase for what i’m trying to get at!

I agree with what you’re saying in that there is far more to it (the use of eccentrics for both hypertrophy and strength) than just extending the TUT.

But my initial point was that in the pure pursuit of hypertrophy (as was asked by the OP) there are several reasons why placing a bigger emphasis on the eccentric phase can be beneficial.

[fergus]

@mickey67 1380 wrote:

You are bang on Ferg !!!!!! (as always )

When I’ve won all you’ve won then I might be close to bang on!
😉

[Author]

Posts