It is very important to understand the following true thing. Women are not a special population. They are half of the population. With very, very few exceptions they are trained in exactly the same way as men the same age are trained. By virtue of a different hormonal profile, the magnitude of change in strength and mass will differ, but the biological processes that bring about those changes are otherwise the same as those in men. Since the processes are the same, the method used to affect the processes will be the same also. And the response to the method will then depend on the effectiveness of the method, not the sex of the individual using it. Many excuses have been made over the centuries that exercise has been practiced, sometimes by women, but usually for them. The bottom line is that everyone, regardless of sex, gets out of a correctly designed training program exactly what they put into it. Ineffective 'firming and toning' routines have no basis in physiology, and the results obtained from them demonstrate this rather conclusively.
That having been said, there are several differences that are observed between the performances of men and women, both in the weight room and on the field. As a general rule, women are not as efficient in terms of neuromuscular efficiency as men. This is probably due to the differences in hormonal profile and the much lower levels of testosterone, and it is evident across the spectrum of performance. Women can use a higher percentage of their 1RM for more reps than men can, probably because their 1RM performance is not as efficient in demonstrating true absolute strength. Vertical jump, throws, snatch, clean and jerk, and other explosive movements that involve high levels of motor unit recruitment are performed at lower levels than men of the same size. While levels of absolute strength relative to muscle mass are essentially the same in men and women, upper body movements suffer from the large relative difference in local muscle mass distribution.
Figure 9-1. Women are more likely to believe that weight training is less important to health and sports performance than men. There is also a social and media-driven misconception that all weight training produces big, masculine, muscular physiques. This does not occur without anabolic steroids. The strongest women in the US perform at their best and look healthy and athletic through the use of correctly designed weight training programs.
As a practical matter, if daily, weekly, or monthly programming models are used to increase strength or power, some modifications are required for women since the intensities used are based on the individual 1RM, and women can work with a higher percentage of this 1RM for reps. For example, table 7-2 indicates that 70% for 10 reps would constitute a heavy set with a high adaptive stimulus, when in reality it is only a medium set with a moderate adaptive stimulus for women. Table 9-1 has adapted the data in table 7-2 for female populations. By the same token, if increased mass is the goal, a relatively larger amount of high volume work over a longer time at a slightly higher intensity would be needed. But if the Hormonal Fluctuation model is used, no modifications are absolutely required. Even though female testosterone levels are lower, a depression of the ratio of testosterone to cortisol is the important factor and the model has been effective in accomplishing this in both sexes. The menstrual cycle, however, may introduce another scheduling factor: there is a testosterone peak at 12 days prior to ovulation that may affect the Hormonal Fluctuation model. Scheduling the maximal workloads to end in proximity to this peak could possibly accelerate recovery and super-compensation. However, no data has yet to demonstrate that such timing would significantly improve performance. The variability of discomfort and associated effects of menses requires close cooperation between trainee and coach. For simplicity and comfort it may be appropriate to program an offload week during menses.
|
|
Subjective Difficulty | ||
| %1RM | Light | Medium | Heavy |
| 100 | --- | --- | 1 |
| 90 | --- | 2 | 5 |
| 80 | 5 | 8 | 10 |
| 70 | 8 | 10 | 12 |
| 60 | 10 | 12 | 15 |
| 50 | 15 | 25 | 25+ |
| Low | Moderate | High | |
| Adaptive Stimulus | |||
One other consideration: the average American female is both iron and calcium deficient. Both of these deficiencies may affect health and performance. Low iron stores can affect metabolism and oxygen transport, leading to a perception of chronic low-energy or fatigue. Altering the diet to include more iron-rich foods, cooking with cast iron cookware, or iron supplementation is a good idea. Low calcium intakes predispose every age group to lower bone density and degeneration (osteopenia). Virtually every study examining weight training with osteoporotic women shows dramatic improvement in bone density. Calcium supplementation improves upon that effect.
So, there are differences in the physical potentials of the two sexes, but they still are trained the same way. The mechanisms, while constrained at different levels by the hormonal milieu, operate the same way. Mammalian physiology is much older than the human species; with very few exceptions, the rules are the same for all of us. Tissues adapt to stress by getting stronger, and the response to the stress is a function of the stress, not the sex of the organism to whom the tissue belongs.