Topic: Methode Naturelle vs. Weights

[max eisenberg]

Wouldn't this be better on the national general discussion board?

That's irrelevant. I'm trying to stimulate IN.

Why not stimulate us all?

As far as MN vs. Weight training, my two cents is this: why not both?  I would think you'd get better overall results this way.  Especially if you throw in flexibility training.

To me the main drawback of MN for strength training (which is not the same as endurance training) is that it can be harder to track your progress.  Going into the gym it's easy to add 5 or 10 pounds every session, it's harder to get a constant progression when you're lifting things of unknown weight. 

i dont go off of that kind of stuff, i go off how i feel. how much easier i can throw a big rock around, how much faster i can climb, run, carry and perform useful movements.

its about usefulness to me, the strength will come with time. as im getting this strength over a longer period of time im learning how to use it as i gain it, not just gaining it and then needing to know how to use it.

i dont feel the need to track body weight, fat index or other things. i go by my spirit and let nature happen by itself.

oh AND i have a damn good time throwing my rock around with a friend (or by myself), way more fun than i ever had in a gym.

[Rafe]

As has been pointed out this is a false dichotomy. Methode Naturelle involves weights, specificially lifting, throwing, catching and carrying them, it patently ridiculous to consider a handsatnd push up more natural then lifting something heavy overhead which were our ancestors more likely to need to do?

Furthermore to the best of my knowledge George Heberts training involved designed objects like barbells as much as it did natural found objects like logs and rocks.

Before you start trying to argue for the superiority of Methode Naturelle you might want to research it a bit more.

Now in reality the specific way that Methode naturelle used weights is probably inferior to more modern methods of weight training notice I say weight training not body building, body building muscle isolation and Machines are completely useless athletically and not part of this debate. Weight training is the use of barbells dumbells and other similar training devices to produce progressive overload of the body to force physiological adaptions to increased strength, power, stamina etc.

Modern studies show you can not gain strength as effectively in fatigued state as when rested, the requirement for continous work in methode naturelle is contrary to the way our bodies work and the best methods for developing strength that have sense been developed.

Methode Naturelle was good system back then, and the basic insight of training in way derived from the way our bodies have been adapted by the natural world around us is as true now as it was then but MN is not the perfect system we should be trying to understand the principles of good physical practice in general and looking at what has made athletes succesfull in sports in general. A big part of that is progressive scaled weight trained with plate loaded barbells and dumbells using major natural compound movement patterns like the squat, deadlift and press.

Finally I have had the oppurtonity to train with Erwan when he was trying to ressurect Methode Naturelle, and when he was formulating his own approach and had many discussions with him as he made the transition. He is very clear if you have not trained with him directly you are not training his MovNat and he has trademarked the name for the very purpose that he can make that distinction. MovNat is his unless your qualified to train with his system you should not claim that is what you are doing.

My opinion is simple, squat, deadlift, and press using barbells for safety and scalability and rocks, logs, and training partners for the development of broad functional capacity, if you find weight training boring your doing it wrong.

[Gregg]

  Hebert's "Practical Guide to Physical Education" [2nd ed] shows them lifting large metal "bricks" - probably the 40kg weights they used for testing. The pics also show old style dumbbells with the black iron spheres on each end, light and heavy bags, ladders, and people.

  The throwing pics show 7.25 kg shot put, large and small rocks, ropes, and discus.

Modern studies show you can not gain strength as effectively in fatigued state as when rested, the requirement for continous work in methode naturelle is contrary to the way our bodies work and the best methods for developing strength that have sense been developed.

Right. Lifting and throwing were in the early part of Hebert's workout, right after the warm-up. There were 3 major two-hand lifts: developpe [press], jete [jerk], and arrache [snatch]. For the heavy bag, they show a combination of deadlift, plus using leverage to get it up on the legs, and over the shoulder. So those lifts would fit right in at CrossFit. 

Erwan said he'd be coming out with pointers on developing a MovNat^tm workout. However, he's also working on a book, and has his seminars this summer, which I can't afford to go to

So until then... here are some training tips from his Twitter feed.

  Training tip: you don't always need to be in nature to move naturally. Do what you can, where you are, with what you have. Be opportunist! 3:15 PM May 25th from web
  Training tip: invest more attention in your inner sensations. It is not just what you do on the outside, it is how it feels in the inside. 7:06 AM May 25th from web
  Training tip: forget the classic muscle isolation and body parts approach. Go for natural movement patterns. Move the primal way. Explore. 2:53 AM May 24th from web
  Training tip: change your approach first. If you go on with a conventional approach, you will end up with the same conventional experience. 7:24 AM May 23rd from web

[Brett Robert]

My opinion is simple, squat, deadlift, and press using barbells for safety and scalability and rocks, logs, and training partners for the development of broad functional capacity, if you find weight training boring your doing it wrong.

I'm with Rafe.  His argument, well put, is essentially my own.  To build strength, or increase stamina, the best methods are those which take into account lessons learned from modern science.  High-intensity interval training, Tabata and barbell weight training (compound & Olympic lifts) are the best ways to increase the body's abilities.  This type of training is also very enjoyable to some people, including me.

Thirdly, injuries are avoided. our bodies were designed to move this way; it's what we should be best at doing. Overuse injuries are almost non-existant, as if you get tired of running, you start climbing or crawling. Completely different movements. Other injuries are also greatly reduced, as the muscles learn to work together. And I'm not just talking about certain arm muscles. When crawling, your arms and legs learn to work together, and so on.

You are making claims.  Do you have evidence to back this up?  By evidence I mean scientific studies.  If not, then these are opinions and you should try to word a bit differently, i.e. "I feel safer doing natural method training because I feel this is how our bodies were designed to move." 

If you honestly only care about looking good, continue, but remember you are giving your own training up for other people's attention, rather than your own personal health.

I care about jumping farther, running longer, sprinting faster, doing high intensity parkour longer, jumping higher and being stronger.  Those are reasons I weight train.  I'm not, nor is anyone here, advocating training in the style of body builders, who train for hypertrophy (muscle growth).  What we're talking about is training for strength.   If you want to learn more about the difference, check out the stickied threads in the General Fitness board and start reading up on it.

Natural training is fun.  I love it.  That's why I had a bunch of people stay at my house this weekend and train.  Saturday we went to the forest, Sunday we went to the beach.  I'm personally bored of urban parkour, to some extent.  Every tree is different, every rock is different.  I love the challenge of lifting and throwing logs or rocks, as each requires a unique modification of grip. 

Fun is great, and yes, a person doing natural method training, or just parkour will be in better shape than someone who does nothing.  However, I'm "old" and busy.  I'm 29 (not really old, I know) and I work and go to school full time.  Time is not something I have enough of to waste.  When I'm out doing parkour, I don't want to do bodyweight squats (pointless anyway) or push ups (also pointless), or anything else, but parkour.  I've been getting better, largely through skill training.  However, it's because I want to get better at parkour that I'm back in the weight room after an absence of several months based on the non-scientific claims of PK Gens.  I've tried bodyweight training and miles of QM.  I felt stronger when I was lifting bodybuilder style (high reps, short rest between sets, body-part splits, etc.)  I know I'll be stronger than either using the strength training methods developed by a century's worth of research by the worlds strong men.  It's fun being strong, it's useful to be strong and I can't wait to hit those longer precisions, higher wall runs and longer haul-ass runs through the forest.

[Gregg]

To build strength, or increase stamina, the best methods are those which take into account lessons learned from modern science.  High-intensity interval training, Tabata and barbell weight training (compound & Olympic lifts) are the best ways to increase the body's abilities.  This type of training is also very enjoyable to some people, including me.

Olympic lifts are Clean/Jerk and Snatch. [Used to also include Clean/Press but wiki says it was discontinued because it was difficult to judge proper form]. MN lifts are... press, jerk and snatch. No problem there.

Tabata [20 sec work, 10 sec rest [x8]]. MN = no significant rests... instead alternate with a derivative exercise - like walking on the 'points' of the feet. So you could lift for 20 sec, walk a 15 m loop, and repeat that [x8].

  A HIIT session consists of a warm up period of exercise, followed by six to ten repetitions of high intensity exercise, separated by medium intensity exercise, and ending with a period of cool down exercise.
  A MN session consists of a warm up period, exercise of increasing intensity, alternating with low or medium level exercise, and ending with a period of cool down exercise [walking] and breathing exercises.

[At least in theory]

Thanks for reminding me of Tabatas and HIIT. I was doing interval training, but lately I've been doing some longer distance slower beach runs, because it feels good, and reduces my stress. I've noticed that my running speed and jumping heights and distances suffered last month. For August I'll try throwing in more of the short intervals.

[Brett Robert]

Thanks for reminding me of Tabatas and HIIT.

You're welcome, and thanks for reminding me of all those ways to incorporate lessons of exercise science into MN! 

[Rafe]

The Methode Naturelle principle of relative rest is great for certain types of training but was not based on any strong logic or deeply practical reason as far as I can tell, that just the way Hebert wanted it to be done. The best studies plus the experience of the best strength coaches through the years to show for maximal strength and power activity full recovery is neccesary and that means rest, and rest means rest like laying on your back rest. If want get moderately strong or have have a good conditioning effect and get your work out done fast, accesory drills, super setting, relative rest are all great, if you want true maximal strength and speed adaptions you need to rest fully.

BTW here is great article on tabatas http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/effects-of-moderate-intensity-endurance-and-high-intensity-intermittent-training-on-anaerobic-capacity-and-vo2-max.html

There is no reason to think 20 and 10 is magic, there are lots of ways to play with intervals don't limit yourself to one interval ratio because its a big fad.

[Patrick "PyroPat" Caric]

wow this thread got really intense.

[(t)Rainer]

HAha, agreed, and I just come back and read more everyday. xD

[Gregg]

Rafe - that's a great article on Tabatas. [by Lyle McDonald]

Over a 6 week period: On stationary bike:

Control group: 10 minute warm-up + 60 minutes at 70% VO2 max x 5 days/ week. [350 min work/ week]
Tabata group: 10 minute warm-up + (20 sec at 170% !! + 10 sec rest)x8 x 4 days/week plus
                    10 minute warm-up + 30 minutes at 70% + 4 sets of Tabata. [98 min work/ week]

Results: Control group - 9.6% increase in VO2 max, basically no anaerobic improvement
            Tabata group - 11.6% increase in VO2 max, 28% increase in anaerobic, but most in the first 4 weeks.
            They were in worse shape than the control group the entire study = started at 92%, finished at 96%

"High-intensity interval training and the Tabata protocol specifically are one tool in the toolbox but anybody proclaiming that intervals can do everything that anyone ever needs to do is cracked. That’s on top of the fact that 99% of people who claim to be doing ‘Tabatas’ aren’t doing anything of the sort."

"Because 8 sets of 20″ hard/10″ easy is NOT the Tabata protocol and body-weight stuff or the other stuff that is often suggested simply cannot achieve the workload of 170% VO2 max that this study used.  It may be challenging and such but the Tabata protocol it ain’t."

Lyle was implying there was basically no difference between the 2 groups. I think this is a faulty conclusion, because he wanted to show there was no difference.

What are the REAL results?
Control group = 9.6% increase in VO2 max, no increase in anaerobic.
Tabata group = 11.6% increase in VO2 max, 28% increase in anaerobic IN 28% OF THE TIME!

If anything, this is a huge advertisement IN FAVOR of doing real [170%] Tabata training. To me, being stuck on a stationary bike in a gym for 6 weeks would be HELL!

I'm still learning about MN. I learn something new every day. For August, I'm going to try to run Tabata sprints. We'll see at the end of the month the improvement in my 100 m, 500 m, and 1500 m times.

Since I started training MN, my 100 went from 15 to 15.1 to 16.3 to 15.56  . My 500 went from 1:57 to 1:35 to 1:49 to 1:43  . My 1500 went from 6:35 to 5:56 to 6:05 to [testing today]. What doesn't show is that now I can run 6 miles at a good pace, and still sprint and kong a picnic table at the end. 

I know 20/ 10 isn't a magic number. I've been doing more distance, or fast runs, but not sprints. The few "sprints" I did this month were usually 60m or so, with a 60m jog or some other fairly long recovery. They obviously didn't help much.

[(t)Rainer]

This is more of a global board discussion though(now that I think about it). None of our guys are even talking about it. xD

[Cameron Scott]

Tabata group = 11.6% increase in VO2 max, 28% increase in anaerobic IN 28% OF THE TIME!

This reminds me of an article I read a month ago.

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/can-you-get-fit-in-six-minutes-a-week/?hp

I didn't do any follow-up reading on it, but it was interesting.

[Gregg]

@ t[Rainer] = I know. Rafe is from WA, Beretta's from CA, I'm from HI.
@ Cameron = thanks for the article. The summary was the best part:

Those six minutes, if they’re to be effective, must hurt. “We describe it as an ‘all-out’ effort,” Gibala says. You’ll be straying “well out of your comfort zone.” That level of discomfort makes some activities better-suited to intense training than others. “We haven’t studied runners,” Gibala says. The pounding involved in repeated sprinting could lead to injuries, depending on a runner’s experience and stride mechanics. But cycling and swimming work well.

I looked up Gibala's abstract. http://jp.physoc.org/content/575/3/901.short
Each session consisted of either four to six repeats of 30 s ‘all out’ cycling at ∼250% VO2 peak with 4 min recovery (SIT)

Total workout time/ week = [4 x :30 sprint + 3 x 4:00 recovery]*3 days/week = 42 min/ week. That doesn't count warm-up or cool-down, either. [WU/CD times aren't listed in the abstract]. Also, this test was only run for TWO WEEKS. So can you get fit in 6 minutes a week? No. But it makes a great article headline.

[John Conway]

This is more of a global board discussion though(now that I think about it). None of our guys are even talking about it. xD

I'm so proud of myself.  *tear