grease the groove @ rip-snopes.com

[mike]

correct in assuming "grease the groove" is just pavel/x-fit marketing/nonsense?

seems so counter-intuitive - and that real strength training would be so much more effective in obtaining their promised "synaptic facilitation" and optimized neural/muscular pathways

[Mark Rippetoe]

Explain.

[mike]

Explain.

quick grabs off google

Here is how Pavel stated it: Muscle failure is more than unnecessary - it is counterproductive! Neuroscientists have known for half a century that if you stimulate a neural pathway, say the bench press groove, and the outcome is positive, future benching will be easier, thanks to the so-called Hebbian rule**. The groove has been ‘greased’. Next time the same amount of mental effort will result in a heavier bench. This is training to success! The opposite is also true. If your body fails to perform your brain’s command, the groove will get ‘rusty’. You are pushing as hard as usual, but the muscles contract weaker then before! To paraphrase powerlifting champ Dr. Terry Todd, if you are training to failure, you are training to fail.

Link Removed. Are you guys ever going to figure this out? We're not here to send traffic to other websites we're not associated with.

**
from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebbian_theory
Hebbian theory is a theory in neuroscience that proposes an explanation for the adaptation of neurons in the brain during the learning process. It describes a basic mechanism for synaptic plasticity, where an increase in synaptic efficacy arises from the presynaptic cell's repeated and persistent stimulation of the postsynaptic cell. Introduced by Donald Hebb in his 1949 book The Organization of Behavior,[1] the theory is also called Hebb's rule, Hebb's postulate, and cell assembly theory. Hebb states it as follows:

"Let us assume that the persistence or repetition of a reverberatory activity (or "trace") tends to induce lasting cellular changes that add to its stability.… When an axon of cell A is near enough to excite a cell B and repeatedly or persistently takes part in firing it, some growth process or metabolic change takes place in one or both cells such that A's efficiency, as one of the cells firing B, is increased."[1]

and a crossfit rendition:
...what does grease the groove mean? It’s an expression by Pavel Tsasouline used to describe constantly training throughout the day. Thinking of it as “practicing” getting stronger. Let’s take pull-ups as an example. If you want to get better at doing pull-ups, a good way to do that is to practice them throughout the day. Go buy a doorway pull-up bar (they’re cheap and easy to install), and every time you walk through that doorway, force yourself to do a few pull-ups. How many? As many as you can do easily without any breakdown in form. Let’s say that’s only 3 right now. That’s fine. Do 3 every time. Within a couple weeks, that will turn to 4, then to 5, and so on. This way, you are conditioning your body to get used to the act of doing a pull-up, thereby making it easier. This can be done with many exercises: push-ups, pistol squats, handstand push-ups, one-armed push-ups, and sit-ups, anything you can think of that you can access throughout the day.

Link removed, goddammit.

seems to fly in the face of the science behind incremental load increases/programing of strength training... a friend is trying to improve her pull-up ability to get into the sheriff academy...i suggested this venue but her cross fit friends are pushing the grease the groove kool-ade

also suggested bands since her upper body strength is so lacking

[WayneL]

I'm not sure what mike is asking about... the time I recall seeing "Grease the Groove" was specifically related to increasing pull-up repetitions. Specifically for trainees able to do a low amount of pull-ups, say 2 three reps, wanting to increase the number of repetitions per set.

This methodology, as I think think the term program implies a bit more thought and process, basically boiled down to. "Do a pull-up every hour or so... basically, when you think about it."

As database dweeb who doesn't resemble a coach at all, I can see two points of merit.

1) The pullup seems to be more of a skill based exercise, and I think I read that somewhere, and thereby practice would presumably help to improve it for a trainee who is a novice... in that specific movement. As I understand it, that it is more of a nervous system type change. Basically, the body learning to do the movement more efficiently, due to the number of muscles needing to work in unison simultaneously rather than the development of additional muscle ect.

So, trainees muscles produce force more efficiently during the movement, trainee doesn't get as tired as fast, trainee is able to do more repetitions.

2) Additional accumulation of volume during the week could be of benefit as well. So basically, you did more work, so your body may adapt to doing more work, which may result in increased repetitions.

I'd imagine adding extra workload especially on what were previously rest days can disrupt the recovery process, but it does "work" to some degree. I used a similar process when I could only do a pullup a day to get to higher numbers eventually reaching a pull up an hour, and then multiple pull-ups.

TLDR; It can help you not get tired as fast. You can then do more reps because you didn't get tired as fast. Diminishing returns, as always, apply.

[Mark Rippetoe]

quick grabs off google

I actually hand in mind that you'd explain it to us. Let me explain: GTG is PRACTICE and the accumulation of volume. To the extent that practice improves the ability to execute a movement more efficiently, it helps. To the extent that maximum force production is facilitated by maximum motor unit recruitment, there is no mechanism by which submaximal effort improves 1RM, at any volume.

Perhaps I don't understand. If you'd like to postulate a mechanism, go ahead.

[mike]

If you'd like to postulate a mechanism, go ahead.

Would be tempted to suggest the classic “placebo effect/crossfit talisman” mechanism, but am too perplexed at their continued worship of a false muscle god, despite seeming to exhibit some degree of insight and actual awareness:

Doing dips GTG doesn't make you any good at other pressing like bench/pushups/HSPUs/press/etc.
http://board.crossfit.com/showthread.php?t=42876&page=2

seems to indicate some realization that the training effect of this “modality” is NOT systemic, which, of course, demands the realization that it's NOT training, which begs the question: why bother?

guess the real mechanism at work would be cognitive dissonance

anyroad, your reply and the "practice" designation will be quite helpful with helping my friend to see the light

thanks!

[Onsager]

I actually hand in mind that you'd explain it to us. Let me explain: GTG is PRACTICE and the accumulation of volume. To the extent that practice improves the ability to execute a movement more efficiently, it helps. To the extent that maximum force production is facilitated by maximum motor unit recruitment, there is no mechanism by which submaximal effort improves 1RM, at any volume.

Perhaps I don't understand. If you'd like to postulate a mechanism, go ahead.

So in order to increase neural recruitment GTG training would have to be done at maximal speed, such as is done with CAT and dynamic effort schools of thought?

[Mark Rippetoe]

As I understand it, neural recruitment varies directly with force production. Force production is dependent on both load and acceleration, but the only way to assure a maximum recruitment event is to perform a 1RM absolute strength performance.

[ud2o]

too lazy or too considerate to clutter this or somewhere else with a new thread.

Rip, awhile I said I was about to squat 500...got a little injury, lazy, etc. got 23lb fat gain. just lost 3lb. blah blah blah.

anyway, tonight i hit 490x2, then about 6m later, 500x1.

just wanted to say thanks to you and all the SSCs here for helping/motivating me.

The Resurrection!

Congrats, KOTJ.

[grumble]

As I understand it, neural recruitment varies directly with force production. Force production is dependent on both load and acceleration, but the only way to assure a maximum recruitment event is to perform a 1RM absolute strength performance.

My understanding was that a moderate rep set (say a set of 10) doesn't initially recruit all muscle fibers, but that as the set progresses and some motor units are exhausted or fire less efficiently, additional higher threshold units are brought online until by the end of the set all available motor units (that haven't already been exhausted) are firing at maximum rate coding available. This might get a little academic, but wouldn't it indicate that so long as the set is heavy enough (say 60%+ 1RM) and the set is done to near-failure, that all motor units are being stressed? Maybe not simultaneously, but over the course of the set they each get pushed to exhaustion. This combined with the volume involved in a 'grease the groove' technique seems like it would help a lot with increasing the top-line weight you can do. If you're doing sets of 25 chinups then yeah i question the maximum force carryover (though the adaptation still has value), and if you're doing stupid low volume low effort throughout the day then yeah it's dumb, but if you're doing moderately challenging sets throughout the day (with the eventual additional of weight to keep the max reps in the sub-15 range) the accumulation of stress would have a fair bit of transfer, wouldn't it?