This is a debate that has been heard by all of us one time or another, I believe: Should strength training be incorporated into HEMA, and how much of it should there be? The extreme usually goes towards having a minimum of strength training, focusing on form and technique instead. Well, I believe it’s time we take a bit more theoretical approach to the issue. Thus, I’ve conducted a short research, and here are the results:
Figure 1: memory encoding
Learning strikes, techniques, footwork and the like is achieved through the phenomenon of motor muscle memory, the basic premise of which is this: the more you repeat a certain action, the better you get at it. A premise accepted widely enough. However, even this seems to have two stages: one happening mainly in the brain, called memory encoding; this term is also generally used for non-physical encoding.
This means the brain is actively connecting the actions needed to make the strike or technique, it is effectively re-mapping our neural pathways so that we are able to perform the action we wish to most effectively. Of course, this is also strengthening over time, as our understanding of strikes and techniques grows better through repetition. This part can be done rather slowly, and should be done so with beginners, so that they do not encode any big mistakes. Once the basic movement has been mastered, however, there is nothing wrong with adding speed to it.
Figure 2: anatomy of a synapse
Consolidation means that the strike has moved to the longterm memory, and thus can be performed much more quickly. What is also of note is that in both stages, synaptogenesis happens: We get new synapses, enabling our nerves to communicate better. Nerve excitability in general is improved, allowing us to make our movements faster. Not only that, through repetition it would seem as if our spine takes over most of the work, shortening the distance and allowing for even better, faster strikes (it is theorized that the brain needs less error correction and so makes it possible for the spine to take over).
So this can be achieved with skill training. For the first part, solo drills with long and short edge are great tools for advancing, as well as drills with a partner. For the second (which should come after the basic movement is good enough, so after the encoding has been sufficiently completed), an exercise which focuses on as many repetitions of a single strike as quickly as possible in a short time interval is most appropriate. So why would we even need strength training? Surely you can build up enough strength through skill drills.
As far as strength training goes, there seems to be a fair number of people claiming it really isn’t all that important in swordfighting. Seeing the information above, it isn’t too difficult to see why. However, reality is not quite so simple.
Figure 3: kettlebell training
To quote the font of all knowledge, which in turn quotes an academic research in this instance: ”strength training enhances motor neuron excitability and induces synaptogenesis, both of which would help in enhancing communication between the nervous system and the muscles themselves.” Simply put, strength training makes your neural connections even stronger. Not only that, ”neurotropic factors within the motor cortex are upregulated in response to endurance training to promote neural survival,” meaning that retention of what you learn in HEMA training is higher when coupled with endurance training (not quite strength training, but not skill training either).
What is important is that both things are done regularly; it won’t help much if you have skill drills one week and strength training another, but it will be greatly benefitial if you train HEMA one day, and strength the next. Of course, there can be a day’s break in between, and it is in fact recommended for regeneration.
In the end, it isn’t about strength vs. skill training, as many seem to believe. The fact is, they are interconnected. This is why we see so much strength training in all sports and competative martial arts: it helps you learn faster. It isn’t just about being stronger, or having a quicker strike. It’s about having the optimum condition for learning the Art. And strength training, which seems underrepresented in HEMA today, is a big part of it.
Sources and further reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_memory#cite_note-Adkins-13
http://sportsnscience.utah.edu/musclememory/
Adkins, DeAnna L., Boychuck, Jeffery. 2006. Motor training induces experience specific patterns of plasticity across motor cortex and spinal cord. Journal of Applied Physiology. 101: 1776-1782; also available through: http://jap.physiology.org/content/101/6/1776.long
http://cognitivephilosophy.net/brain-research/neuroplasticity-in-brief/
Figure sources:
Figure 1: http://psychclasses.wikispaces.com/Group+-+Chapter+07+-+Memory – taken on 2nd December 2012
Figure 2: http://scienceblogs.com/purepedantry/2007/03/06/neuron-to-glia-synapse-on-axon/ – taken on 2nd December 2012
Figure 3: http://www.vision-academy.co.uk/kettlebells – taken on 2nd December 2012
“For the ende of this arte is not to lifte up or beare great burdens, but to move swiftelie. And there is no doubt but he vanquisheth which is most nimble, and this nimblenesse is not obtained by handling of great heftes or waightes, but by often moving.” -Giacomo Di Grassi c. 1570
John, while following old masters is fine and well, and above all necessary, we should not simply dismiss decades of study and research on account of a few lines in a manuscript. I am not arguing that someone who has been training a weapon for years will defeat someone who has been lifting weights for years. However, according to research, someone who trains HEMA 6 hours a week and lifts weights for 2 hours a week will advance faster than if they trained only for 6 hours a week. Even more, I dare say they’d advance faster than someone who trains HEMA 8 hours a week. Again, it’s not about one vs. the other. It’s about how one influences the other, and there is synergy there. We have models that detail the neurological processes of obtaining motor skills – I’ve provided a link to a research of such a model – why would it be so bad to use it to take the Art to the next level?
Sure, it requires more effort – and lifting weights, or running, or any other form of endurance/strength training is a lot less fun than swinging a sword. But it might be what we need to eventually get masters of the Art. Seems like a fair trade-off to me.
With respect, I wasn’t attempting to dismiss or argue anything. I was merely sharing a direct quote from the corpus of extant martial treatises which had some relevance to the topic at hand. A close examination of the same corpus will also reveal multiple instances of resistance training (for example: the hefting of stones in Talhoffer).
Excellent article.
I think, for me personally, that you have missed an element of the strength v’s skill argument. That is in order to perform a skill correctly you do need an existing base level of strength. Also it is my understanding is that it is far more difficult to correct muscle memory once it is encoded and therefore much better to train it correctly in the first place.
Therefore before you even pick up a sword and begin training at skill you would do well to get the basic strength to handle the sword with ease. Otherwise you are open to the possibility that we all see: people who train and encode “lazy” technique (low guards, sloppy cuts, bad posture, terrible footwork etc) because they do not possess the basic strength required. Because this technique is encoded as the fundamental that all else is built upon it is then extremely hard to undo.
In short, far better a few months of exclusive physical training than years of trying to undo bad muscle memory.
Congrats on putting together a well researched and well organized article.
In an attempt to complement your article, so as to take it an additional step forward in the form of establishing the bridge between a theoretical and a more practical (training / coaching) standpoint, I would to share the following elements:
1. Though you did a very good job in being as politically correct as one can possibly be, strength training’s positive influence on sport specific performance isn’t a matter of opinion. Properly chosen strength training improves sport specific performance.
2. Hence, after overcoming this false debate of: to strength train or not to strength train? The question that people need to evolve to is: what type of strength training fits martial artists’ needs and, more specifically, HEMA practitioners?
Simply, and empirically put, few would probably see any advantage in, suddenly, developing “Arnold’s” Terminator physique but, at the same time, few would probably see it as negative thing to have the “super-powers” of an Olympic gymnast. Strength training in a complex thing and no training program falls in either the extreme of not being useful to anyone nor in the opposite extreme of being the magical solution that fits all.
How to strength train? What exercises and how much? Those are the true questions.
Answering these latter questions requires starting by coming to terms with the initial premise of there being no single and unique recipe that fits all (yes, not all champions train the same way and even the same coach trains different athletes differently, given that they are DIFFERENT after all) and, afterwards, understanding two main categories of variables:
a. Understanding these arts’ specific techniques, in the sense of effectively diagnosing the type of physical attributes required so as to properly perform the arts’ techniques.
b. Understanding each specific practitioner’s personal conditions:
i. Whether he / she is lacking any physical attributes so as to properly develop the arts’ motor patterns and, if so, which one and to what degree?
ex: While a person who already performs a full split can immediately be introduced to specific exercises so as to develop high kicks (again, just a conceptual example), another person who cannot lift the lower limb beyond 90 degrees needs to start by developing range of motion.
ii. Organizational variables influencing training potential
ex1: Should one practitioner train twice a week, while another 7 times / week, even if they happen to share the same coach, the prescribed ratio of fencing training and strength training will obviously differ.
ex2: Which stage of the season is a given practitioner in? 3 months, 3 weeks or 3 days from the main competition?
Overall, this leads us to two final conclusions that many people dislike:
1) There are no easy to follow recipes, which means that it can feel like being in a difficult maze and, therefore, a huge headache,
2) It pays to have a competent coach with a strong knowledge of the sport in question on top of an equally strong scientific and pedagogical training, but, although this pays off, it must also be paid for 😉
Hope this helps to sort out some thoughts and fuel new ones.
However, should you be interested in learning more about this topic, I’ve put together a full book on this issue (Understanding physical conditioning: a movement based approach) which is an extended version of my graduation masters paper at UBC last year (which received an A grade).
Kind regards,
Luís
One excellent article!
I only hope to add to it, and in doing so perhaps rephrase some points made by mister Preto in his reaction, for those who are relatively new to strength trainging or perhaps active sports in general (before they started in HEMA)
First allow me to point out different types of strength and strength training. There is a huge difference between strength training for sports and bodybuilding (where many people automatically think of when they hear the term strength training).
‘Arnold-like’ physiques require lifting very heavy objects at rather a slow pace, obviously rarely beneficial for sports where speed is of the essence. But this is purely ‘strength’. What martial artists require is ‘power’.
Power is the ability to produce a certain, preferably large, amount of strength in a short-as-possible amount of time. For instance in leaping (producing a vast amount of strength in a short time to propel one into a direction away from one’s current position) or certain throws in wrestling (shooting under the opponent and lifting them up before they can defend). To perform such moves a certain level of base/general fitness is required, but from a certain level it certainly pays of to train one’s power aimed at their sport specific requirements.
That is where ‘non-mr.universe’ strength training comes into play. There is a lot more to physical training than just lifting heavy stuff. One can look to plyometrics (or at least plyometric elements in their training) and weighted sport specific moves to improve one’s power. This can be aimed at sword related sports rather effectively. We tend to leap alot and use our arms (and thus in extend our chest) a lot, so where (just for instance, there are many, many more options) regular push-ups and squats are a fine way to build a base fitness, for HEMA it would pay to up the ante and add plyometric elements, making it jump squats (or jump lunges) and plyo-push ups or clap push ups (or currently my personal favourite for sword fighters; plyo alternating staggered push ups). Thus creating strength training in order to enhance one’s ability ‘not to lifte up or beare great burdens, but to move swiftelie.’ As quite rightly put by mister Di Grassi.
Doing so not only delivers apt training for one’s sport, it actually reduces the difference between skill training and strength training, sometimes to the point of overlapping or exchangeability.
But this is not new. In period texts and drawings fighters are shown training to encrease their strenght, nay, their power. A single instnace illustrates it very well, one in which people are picking up and tossing away heavy boulders. Note: tossing boulders. Not lifting them repeatly over their head in an olympic weightlifting manner to increase strength. Throwing them as far as they could as training to increase their power output.
I hope this will be a helpfull illustration of the differences and possibilities.
Kind regards,
Maurice Booij
Strenght adaptations are very specific, therefore, very simply put, look at people’s sport specific performance (HEMA, in the present case) and, upon identifying a technical mistake, ask yourself: What’s causing it? Mere lack of coordination or lack of a given pre-requisite in the form of a physical attibute? Strength training is, for the most part, a neccessity, but one that needs to be coordinated (in type and quantity) according to the qualitative evaluation and interpretation of practitioners’ performance regarding in terms of their sport specific motor patterns (technique). If properly done, the matrix becomes clear and improvement is always accomplished. Instead, those who merely follow trends, improve only occasionally.