I'VE FOUND THE PLACE FOR THE 1x20 METHOD OF TRAINING !
IS IT TIME TO RE-INVENT A POPULAR TRAINING METHOD ?
Hopefully by now most Strength and Conditioning Coaches (S&C’s) and other applied practitioners in the fitness training world will be familiar with the concept of 1×20 training. This method was popularized by Dr Michael Yessis in 2014, who wrote the book ‘ The Revolutionary 1 x 20 RM Strength Training Program ‘ (a recommended read for anyone looking to learn more about the 1×20 method of training).
Though we should also be aware that variations of this method have been around since at least the 1950s, with the Soviets likely trying every style of training! However, I would say that over the past few years in particular this has become a popular training method, with more content being written around the history and application of 1×20.
In my own programming I began experimenting with 1×20 training during my time at NC State University in 2017. However, as a couple of years passed, I began to adapt my thoughts and processes around the use of 1×20. As such I don’t quite use it in the way that Dr Yessis proposed. Instead I have found what I consider a better place for this “revolutionary” method.
WHAT IS 1x20 TRAINING?
Before we jump in, as a brief overview, Dr Yessis proposed this method as a means to develop general strength and endurance qualities. A means to build the foundation needed particularly for beginner athletes. He suggested that other program methods fall short in teaching coordination, conditioning and general strength of movements due to being too high intensity in comparison to this repetition based methodology. As such this method was targeted during the general physical preparedness stage (GPP) with the potential inclusion and transition to specific physical preparation (SPP) within a periodised plan to develop these qualities.
The main purpose of 1×20 is to distribute sets across various “foundational exercise movements” related to every joint action that could be used in the sporting domain (e.g. squat, hinge, push, pull, rotation etc…). This is all done using a total body split within one session. Leaving no muscle in the body untrained.
The primary goal is to perform 1 set of 20 repetition max (RM) on around 15-25 exercises within the session. With the view to progress the loads of each exercise overtime, each session, as the week’s compound, with a total session exposure of around 3x per week.
Consequently there have been a few adaptations to this type of program with a number of coaches putting their own spin on things. Either using more exercises (up to 30+), more or less frequency (2-5 sessions), and adjusted intensity progressions in comparison to those recommended originally. All of which have been built on the underlying principles outlined by Dr Yessis.
To my knowledge there hasn’t been any peer reviewed scientific evidence to support this method as a training intervention (please send if you have something). However, a blog article by Zweifel (2016) is the closest thing we have to a study.
It was shown that there were some similar outcomes to improved physical performance assessments when comparing 1×20 to a more traditional approach of training, though it failed to improve sport specific qualities (e.g. pitching velocity in baseball pitchers). So we could conclude (at least from this article) that 1×20 might be a viable method for athletes during the GPP phase (and may even be improved with the inclusion of sport specific exercises per Dr Yessis recommendations).
With all this in mind I have some different opinions on the utility of the 1×20 method particularly within the delivery to sports athletes…
SO HOW DO I USE 1x20?
Despite the hype surrounding 1×20, I have often struggled to rationalize its full use in my setting (working with collegiate and professional athletes). Especially as there is a lack of evidence surrounding the method, which makes it hard to know whether this is just hype or an effective method.
While some S&C coaches have made a good practical argument for it [HERE], what I have seen discussed to present date still hasn’t convinced me enough to use 1×20 as a stand alone program with my sporting athlete groups.
However, despite my skepticism, I have found use for some of the principles of the 1×20 method within my programming. Which we explore in the following section:
1x20 AS A MOVEMENT SCREEN
Within the sport setting (e.g. collegiate / pro basketball) often you will have new recruits (e.g. drafted athletes, players traded from another team, transfers or a new batch of freshman athletes). As a coach we need a method to quickly evaluate the athletes movement qualities.
Once upon a time, for me as a younger coach, this meant performing a formalized movement screen (like the FMS) and determining how well someone moves within this defined criteria. I would then take the components of the movement screen and then build out a program based on the individual’s needs and areas of limitations.
However, this approach had several pitfalls, such as not really predicting movement of the subsequent exercise patterns that I would use for an athlete in their program (e.g. they would look better in a squat pattern under load than in an overhead squat with a dowel). Additionally, I found myself assessing the actual movements in the program more regularly, without reverting back to the original screen as much. Lastly, I would continually observe progression within my exercises programmed, which wouldn’t always transfer to the movement screen outcomes (SAID principle?).
Therefore I needed something a little more specific to my program, at least to decide whether an athlete could execute the movements correctly and efficiently, which would mean we can begin a loading progression.
So what better than using 1×20 as a movement screen given that this method was originally intended to build coordination, general strength and endurance qualities.
As the athlete performs a number of reps with a “challenging enough” intensity we can quickly review the athlete’s competency in the pattern and areas that need to be coached, or potentially regressed, in addition to other typical “performance assessments” that they may perform.
This approach becomes its own session. Which means we aren’t losing a training day, which would typically be partly eaten by a lower intensity movement screen of bodyweight movements, at least from my experience of running a full FMS + additional assessments with my athlete groups in the past…
Here are the steps you can take to create a 1x20 movement screen:
- Create your proposed exercise menu (generally cap this at 30 but at least your 10 primary exercises / movement patterns for your program).
- Create a movement criteria checklist for each of your exercises (e.g. how you would like this exercise performed in a perfect world).
- Have the athlete perform 20 reps of a light yet challenging load they know they can achieve 20 reps with.
- Assess how the athlete performs in comparison to your criteria (make quick observation notes)
- Assess how many more reps they could’ve done (if >10 repeat this session with a higher load to assess capacity).
" BUT HOW CAN I DO THIS WITH A LARGE GROUP ? "
Typically one concern that often arises when I discuss this method is how do you perform this screen with a larger group?
Lucky for me I work with a smaller roster in basketball so this becomes fairly easy to achieve with roughly 5 incoming athletes. I typically split my groups into smaller manageable groups to perform the checklist during the training day. Or perform it for individuals who have been identified as lower in experience or “bad movers” by coaches and scouts.
However, I do appreciate the concerns from those coaches with larger groups. My first response is – “do you already do a movement screen?” if the answer is yes then just replace this with your original process (assuming you have a means to evaluate the original screen.
For those with larger intakes or starting out with a new group you do have a number of options at your disposal:
1) Don’t try and do it all in 1 session. Use the first week or so to get a couple of sessions of these exposures and make a note of the athletes that you observe and don’t (this doesn’t have to be super formal
2) Like me, split your group into smaller groups and complete the session across the day (recruit the help of some of your peers). Yeah this will take more time, but will be worth it (better than the time you would spend doing your usual movement screening systems).
3) Use a few exercises that you feel are more complex patterns (more uncertainty on execution) as warm ups so the warm up becomes another movement screen. Your primary lifting exercises can be less complex patterns so there is less likelihood that your athletes can’t perform the exercise. Then progress / regress as you see fit.
To the last point there is a whole untapped utility of 1×20 for warm ups within your sessions even beyond that of a movement screen. Which can also serve as future movement screens for other program decisions and progressions.
1x20 AS SESSION PREPARATION / WARM UPS
One of the biggest utilities of 1×20 to date for me is that it can also be a solid “warm up” method.
When I began reflecting on my warm up delivery particularly during my time in the NBA, I realized that I needed a more efficient method to expose athletes to a quick warm up sequence before transitioning to the primary exercises for the day or prior to practice. Particularly in those situations when time was limited (i.e. in-season). Given that time was a limitation, I needed exercises that combined a number of elements into one movement and a fast way to deliver this while still getting a desirable volume of exposure.
The combination of a quick circuit style 1×20 method was what I landed upon to serve this purpose.
This replaced my traditional warm up process, which was typically a couple of sets of different exercises with lower rep ranges (<10). Given that the original 1×20 was designed to target multiple joints and muscles across different movement actions, we can now implement a method to expose the athlete to higher volumes of reps more quickly with “warm up” style exercises that hit all areas of the body.
Additionally, this made for an easier way of repeating patterns with the prehab/rehab work prescribed by PT/ATs as part of the athletes preparation process. So the 1×20 warm up also created an integrated approach within the program, by convincing my colleagues that this is a way to get those lower threshold exercises into the program with sufficient volume too. Therefore the warm up became specific preparation for the athletes needs for that day incorporating their medical and performance routines as one.
The general guiding principles of 1×20 is with progressive overload overtime, increasing intensity over several sessions and building work capacity. This progression is also something that makes the warm up more than just a warm up. With a specific delineated progression overtime – so we are getting overload from both the session preparation and main session.
It is also suggested due to the nature of the intensities (around 20 RM with 1 set of volume) that not much muscle damage is created with this format. As such it becomes a lucrative one to use during particularly dense schedule periods which you find in-season with basketball.
From the above example I typically use the following general formula to create my warm ups:
Firstly I like to start with a couple of general mobility patterns focussing on ankle / knee / hip / shoulder / spine. These can be combined in any way, depending on the session goals, and individual athlete needs/groupings. In the case of the example we are preparing for Trap Bar Deadlift / High Pulls for the day.
Then I like to pair some isometric work whereby the other extremity is moving (i.e. if a person is performing a split squat iso, they are doing medicine ball rotations, cable presses, plate holds with reaches etc…). In this example we have a hanging position in which resisted hip flexion is performed with a mini band and a split squat isometric with med ball chop rotations.
Finally we move into the plyometrics / jumping actions and locomotive exercises, before doing either an unloaded or light loaded set of the primary exercise.
I’ve found this format to enhance my warm up delivery with the specific purpose of exposing the body to patterns and load before the primary physiological stimulus is applied.
Additionally, it’s thought that 1×20 methods don’t expose enough load to connective tissue structures (such as tendons) and are insufficient stimulus for these adaptations to occur. This is one of my reasons to get some volume of plyometric actions using this method in the warm up.
As such we now have the 1×20 warm up method that hits all factors of athlete preparedness for a session (whether that’s lifting or sport specific training).
1x20 TRAINING FOR GENERAL STRENGTH
Okay so I might have lied a little bit, I do actually have two main scenarios in which I use the 1×20 method as a complete program (with a slight general adaptation from the program detailed by Dr Yessis).
There are two main groups that I use this method of programming with:
- My general population clients
- A freshman athlete / rookie that I haven’t seen in person yet
The reason why I use this program with these two populations are the following:
- It’s unlikely that someone is going to get hurt doing a light load of high volume exercises, so the relative risk is lower particularly for those people I don’t see in person.
- Both the general population and rookie athletes have one thing in common, they likely need exposure to general strength qualities across a multitude of movement patterns. This method’s primary purpose is to increase the capacity and coordination of these exercise movements.
- It’s fairly simple to progress overtime and can be self regulated (i.e. can do more reps with the intended weight). This sets a foundation for more advanced programming and sets x reps schemes.
- It establishes a means of communication to figure out what exercises work well for the athlete/client and what they enjoy most in their program.
- It makes session flow easier as the person can stay in one part of the commercial gym for several of their exercises. Rather than moving around and requiring multiple implements at the same time (like super set training).
LET'S SUMMARIZE
1×20 has become a popular method of training amongst the strength and conditioning and sports performance community. While I have likely missed some details that other practitioners have found using 1×20, the information online is actually pretty scarce in terms of programming examples that go beyond Dr Yessis concepts.
There is also a lack of research studies comparing this training method which identifies a gap in the literature.
Nevertheless, In this post I propose a couple of alternative uses for the 1×20 method, which to my knowledge have not been discussed before:
- Using 1×20 as a movement screen
- Using 1×20 for session preparation / warming up
I believe these options offer a better utility of 1×20 within the sport performance setting in comparison to Dr Yessis’s work. However I still feel there is utility particularly for novice athletes to use a standalone 1×20 program.
Both of these concepts require some specific thought of how you would use them within your setting and develop a specific system.
Though I have provided some examples of a general framework of how I go about things that can hopefully inspire you to create your own.
If you found this article useful please share, and If you have any additional comments feel free to comment below.
Perhaps you want to learn. more about 1×20? I recommend Dr Michael Yessis in book ‘ The Revolutionary 1 x 20 RM Strength Training Program ‘
Pingback: THE 20×1 STRENGTH TRAINING METHOD - A NEW APPROACH TO STRENGTH TRAINING?