So let's stick with potentiation or PAP for the long version. For the layman's version it means that after lifting a heavy load your strength is "potentiated" a bit. The effect is residual so that right after you lift a heavy load you get this enhanced strength effect and repeated exposure makes this potentiation a semi-permanent state. Now we have one more reason why I PREACH about heavy loads.

Here is the more precise and complete explanation that I have taken from "The Singles Scene" by myself and Joe Weir. When I say precise and complete I mean more-so than the one above. I've lefts some unnecessary technical info out:

"A nerve impulse arrives at the NMJ (neuro-muscular junction). Ach (acetylcholine) is released into the synaptic cleft. This is excitation. Some stuff happens and what results is an action potential which travels the fiber to the muscle.

When Ach is released it excites the post-synaptic membrane of the connecting neuron, thus changing membrane permeability. If threshold for excitation is reached, the change in membrane potential between the two motor neurons increases the flow of positive charges into the cell and this is called the EPSP (excitatory post-synaptic potential). This EPSP must be at threshold for the neuron to discharge. But even if it is not the resting membrane potential is temporarily lowered and its tendency to fire is increased.

Basically the neuron’s potential to fire and thus stimulate its motor unit(s) is on more of a “hair-trigger”. It is less “inhibited” than it was prior to the beginning of a training session.

This results in both temporary changes during a workout and repeated exposure to very heavy lifting results in more permanent changes. This is part of the explanation for neural changes accounting for strength gains, especially early on."

The long-term effects of facilitation we need not concern ourselves with except to realize it is one of the ways in which the nervous system adapts to heavy lifting and thus how we grow stronger.

The short term and more immediate effects are what many so called "advanced" methods try to take advantage of. Waved sets or "wave loading" is the most famous "method" of taking advantage of this phenomenon.

The most basic method of performing waved sets is to simply perform each set with less reps and a heavier load. Such as 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. The "four squat" workout that we talk about at GUS quite often is actually uses this type of waved sets. Except that instead of increasing the weight on the same exercise for each successive "wave" we use progressively heavier squat variations for each new wave. So a four squat workout might go from overhead squats to front squats to back squats to some type of "half squat", of which the Anderson half squat is our favorite.

The 5/1 method is another common one. It starts with a set of 5 using a 6 rep maximum, then a single using a two rep maximum. Then an increase to a five rep maximum and 1RM respectively. The idea being that the successive waves result eventually in using a weight you wouldn't have originally been able to perform a full five reps with followed by a heavier single than you pulled off with your "1RM".

Charles Poliquan came up with a 1/6 method which starts with a single and then a set of six, followed by successively heavier singles and sets of six.

There are several other varieties. What they have in common is that they assume there is a magical ratio of sets to weight that results in a certain increase in ability.

This has nothing to do with trying to get big singles. It just has to do with increasing your ability to do more work at the rep range that is being targeted by gradually lifting bigger singles which gives you post-tetanic potentiation. However the problem is most people make grand predictions and give grand plans about what you can do with this as if there can be predictions made. Poliquan's naming his method a "principle" speaks to this kind of thinking. There are no "principles" involved here. You have to just play it by ear see what happens with it.

So these methods of wave loading are nothing more than routines based on expectations. If they succeed then we have managed to get our reps, in a prearranged way, just as most "methods" have us do. We learn nothing about the "potential" of potentiation. If we fail we think that there is nothing to this potentiation thing! So remember the old adage. Methods are not theory. There is nothing inherently wrong with the methods as long as we remember that they are just that…methods.

PAP is not that predictable. What is a facilitating load for one trainee is a fatiguing and debilitating load for another. Beginners will not respond as well as more seasoned lifters and beginners need not and should not lift the kind of loads that are required. However there is no rule that maximal loads are required so a beginner might benefit from PAP by using somewhat heavier loads than the planned working weight. However, for the beginner, it is probably best to start with at least a loosely defined procedure.

He or she might put on an extra 10 to 15 pounds and, before the initial set of 6, do two reps and rest liberally before the first working set. For some this can have one of two effects, or both. The working sets speed and power will increase somewhat and a rep or two may be able to be added where it wouldn't have before.

The trainee may be able to repeat the procedure and gain another rep or two, for the remaining sets, or just have the advantage of having lifted a bit heavier without lifting maximally. So notice that it is not necessary to lift near maximal weights to take advantage of facilitation. For the idea outlined here, my rule of thumb is one "heavy" rep for every 3 working reps. Keep in mind the increase in workload but as long as the rest periods are kept liberal enough recovery should not be greatly affected.

The reason that they are asking these questions is that many strength training exercise names are stupid. Absolutely non-descriptive and useless so that an exercise that in simply a derivative or variation of another basic lift becomes confused and misrepresented.

Before I begin discussing this problem I want to acknowledge that not all exercise variation lend themselves to descriptive names and perfection can not always be achieved. Sometimes an attempt to make a descriptive name can cause as much confusion as a non-descriptive name since many variations differ in very slight ways that must be explained thoroughly.

The other problem is that a descriptive name is a long and verbose name. Clearly we don't want to be discussing and writing long winded exercise names. Much of the time jargon and snappy names are as much about brevity and efficiency as anything else. So I do not want to propose just abandoning the common names that we are all familiar with. Instead I want to discuss some personal naming habits that will help you make sense of all the variations out there.

How are Exercises Named?

There are two most commons ways. They are named after the person who "invented" them. Or they are named based on the nationality of a lifter or group of lifters who were observed doing them. Sometimes, also, exercises are named based on a superficial observation of their appearance (such as “windmills”).

It is very rare for a truly unique exercise to be "invented" by one person. Just like it is difficult to write a Country song that doesn't sound like another one it is hard to invent an exercise that someone hasn't done. Most exercises that have inappropriate names, then, are but variations of another common exercise. Which is even worse since the name doesn't help the trainee understand just what is different.

Military Press, for instance, is a bad name for a lift. I discuss how one might go about naming the press in How to Perform the Military Press (Standing Overhead Barbell Press).

• Romanian Deadlifts - supposedly coined by Jimmy Shmitz because he saw some Romanians doing them
• Yates Rows - named for Dorian Yates making people think Yates Rows would give them Dorian's back
• Cuban Press - Poliquan claims to have named this, probably while eating at a Panera Bread
• JS or Pendlay Rows -bad name AND bad exercise, named for John Smith AND for Glenn Pendlay
• Bulgarian Squats - You can figure it out
• Triceps Kickbacks - I know you don't do them but it's still a bad name because it makes the exercise sound explosive
• Dive Bomber Pushups - don't even know what these are, guess why? Don't much care either
• Renegade Rows - it's a prone "plank" row named because John Davies really likes Lorenzo Lamas
• Sumo Deadlifts or Squats - such a stupid name. Are you supposed to run at the rack and do a belly bump?
• Burpees - apparently named for American psychologist Royal H. Burpee
• Preacher Curl - is it because the preacher bench looks like a pulpit? Or because a preacher invented them? Or both?
• Scott Bench Curl - another name for a preacher curl
• French Curl - how much more stupid can a name get? Even skull crusher is better. It's a lying triceps extension (or triceps press) overhead
• French Press - the more common name for a French curl. We don't even know whether it is a press or a curl? What is a curl anyway? It's a supine elbow extension and that is not a curl because a curl is a flexion. Or is it?
• Arnold Press - that's the newspaper that covers the California government

I'm sure you have the idea by now. There is little thought or logic involved in naming these exercises. The names are stupid and non-descriptive. Even the word "curl" is only agreed upon by convention. Why is it okay to refer to a supine triceps extension as a French curl or even a triceps curl? How is that different from a barbell curl? There is no rhyme or reason involved. However, we are probably stuck with stupid exercise names. That does not mean that we cannot privately adopt the practice of categorizing exercises with more appropriate and descriptive names..at least for ourselves and our trainees.

Here is what you want to consider, in no particular order:

1. Is the exercise a single joint or multi-joint exercise?

a. If it is a single joint exercise what is the joint action that is performed?

b. If it is a multi-joint exercise what is the movement that is performed? Squat? Lunge? Other?

2. Is it better classified as a "lift" rather than an exercise? For example, a "press" is a movement OR a lift. A flexion or extension is a joint action or movement. A pull is different from a squat but both can be considered lifts when free weight are used.

3. What is the body position? Supine, prone, upright, seated, side-lying or other?

4. What is the implement or resistance used? Barbell, dumbbell, kettlebell, sandbag, pulley, or other?

As I said before not all names can be improved upon but in the case of the "classics" the variation or derivatives usually can stand improvement.

We can't do too much better than "Dead Lift" but keep in mind that this was once called the "dead weight lift" and even so we can call it “dead weight pull to waist” to differentiate it from a "squat with the bar on the floor".

However, the Romanian and Stiff-Legged Deadlift are not "dead" lifts at all since they are not done from the floor but we would be foolish to rename them in terms unrelated to the deadlift since this would result in even more confusion. However, "deadlift from hang or upright position" would be a place to start.

• Common Fish Oil Questions Answered - A Baker’s Dozen

I added to more questions to the original thirteen since I posted this. Keep in mind that you can get all the in-depth information on fish oil and omega-3 fatty acids at GUS that you need but this post is a quick reference to the questions I’ve come across the most often…

• The Strength and Pain Plot

You're going to wonder why there is a psychology lecture on a strength training blog, I'm sure. Well bear with me because I'm not even going to talk about psychology, even though that is an interest of mine. Listen to the lecture by Dr. Paul Bloom of Yale University and get with me on this because it relates to some of the points I've been making in my posts here and many comments and articles throughout the site…

• Nutrition is not a True of False Proposition

You can’t learn nutrition from online quizzes or questionnaires!

• Instinctual Eating and Appetite

Myths about “naturally” thin people are covered in this post, among other points. If you struggle with your weight you may be surprised by some of this…

• Hunger is a Physical Feeling

A little off the beaten path for me but enlightening nonetheless, I hope. It is important to understand what hunger actually is.