Fractal Periodisation?

[Guest guest]

Pacey wrote:

<I was wondering if anyone had any comments on the following piece, or had

more information on fractal periodization. Lowery doesn't state the speakers

name, so I'm not sure where to find more on it than than this rather

" dumbed-down " version from T-mag.

<<Muscle in Memphis

ASEP National Conference Report

by Lonnie Lowery

The conference ended with an absolutely esoteric talk on " fractal

periodization. " This is worth an article in itself. Fractals, for you

neophytes (like I was), are self-repeating designs that retain their

characteristic look no matter how closely one inspects them. Imagine a

" Spiro-graph " toy picture (remember those?) that is made up of infinitely

many tiny versions of itself.

How in Einstein's name does this relate to training? Well, whether a person

is planning macro-cycles (years), meso-cycles (months), or microcycles

(day-to-day), the need for ebb and flow of intensity and volume looks the

same. You know: get brutal, then pull back on the reins, repeat. The optimal

amount of time spent in the high-intensity (or volume) phase is highly

individual. Within a micro-cycle, some individuals can go hard for nearly a

week straight while others can only do a " one on, one off " routine. The same

holds true for meso-cycles: some can train 'flat-out' for 12 weeks straight

while some can only go six or eight.

The other critical key in fractal periodization is one's starting point. At

what point in the Spiro-graph curve are you beginning? It's a critically

important issue because it determines your ending point. It's not just a

copout regarding genetic differences. We all start out differently and those

who choose their parents poorly just have to plan differently. >>

*** Just after I had sent in my earlier letter on " Alternative Physics " , this

gem had to arrive, showing a very serious misapplication of Mandelbrot's

fractal theory. Thanks for the wonderful example of alternative sports

physics guruspeak! This attempt at application of fractal theory to sports

training reveals a deficiency in both the understanding of the mathematics of

fractals and the theory of periodisation (as one of several different methods

of long-term sports organisation and planning).

Periodisation in no ways (except possibly in the names of the various cycles)

replicates itself from the microscopic to the macroscopic level and the

mathematics describing factors such as intensity and volume does not even

vaguely resemble the functions used to generate fractals. Moreover, whoever

tried to devise that fractal periodisation model conveniently halted the

modelling process before it reached the essential units that are basic to all

strength training, namely factors such as sets, reps, rest periods, loads,

duration of exercises, speed of execution, the patterns of movement and

exercises themselves. That immediately creates an hiatus in the sequence of

fractal replicas from the macroscopic to the microscopic level.

Moreover, there are numerous different periodisation models and these often

change due to unexpected factors such as injury, change in competitive

roster, inexplicable leaps in performance and personal problems. Any precise

replication is being based upon a very simplistic, abbreviated and specific

form of Matveyev's fundamental periodisation model for the beginner or

relative novice, not for the continued training of the improving athlete.

This is evident because the author of that idea stated that " the need for ebb

and flow of intensity and volume looks the same " , which is the limited

concept that so many folk have of periodisation in the West.

True fractals describe natural processes whose parameters do not change

according to the preferences, whims and feelings of a subjective coach or

athlete. Even then, the application of fractal theory to realistically

describe phenomena such as the branching of trees, rivers and arteries, may

have some descriptive value, but, in such cases does little to explain,

analyse or manipulate. Thus, it may be more artistic than scientific in

certain respects. It is not even desirable that any periodisation model is

that deterministic, anyway, because adaptation to physiological and

psychological stresses tends to be nonlinear and sometimes highly unpr

edictable. Even if some sort of crude fractal periodisation model

could be devised by some wild stretch of the imagination and a lot of

tolerance for imprecision, the result would simply be something that

describes, but does nothing to aid in the practise of sport.

The author above stated that fractals " ... are self-repeating designs that

retain their characteristic look no matter how closely one inspects them " ,

which most definitely is not the case in strength or any other sports

periodisation. The 'patterns' at the macroscopic, mesocyclic and microcyclic

levels do not repeat themselves even for short periods, so the fractal

analogy is flawed from the very outset.

Just to keep up with the times, I think I now need to add the term " fractal "

to my guru terminology kit that I offered list members some months ago:

<Supertraining/message/9391>

Indeed, to quote our intrepid author, " How in Einstein's name does this

relate to training? " Without indulging in any more guruspeak or scientific

jargon, let us summarise all of the above and state that the idea of " fractal

periodisation " might initially sound appealing and innovative, but is

incorrect, ignorant, entirely superfluous and useless in practical

application.

Just for curiosity's sake, , see if you can find out more from T-mag or

wherever appropriate more about that presentation on this topic.

Dr Mel C Siff

Denver, USA

Supertraining/