The Absolute Conjugate Strategy: Connective Tissue Architecture Training

Achieving Paradigm Shifts: Applying Bulgarian Training Innovations to Enhance Reactive Strength through Connective Tissue-Specific Training.

Ivan Abadzhiev (on the right) conducted a training session with his athletes in Bulgaria in the 1970s. Source

Acknowledging the Gap in Connective Tissue-Specific Training in Sports Science

Connective tissue-specific training is not a widely discussed topic in the field of Training Science (don’t take our word for it; look it up). For instance, it is not mentioned at all in the latest edition of the Science and Practice of Strength Training. However, considering the frequency with which athletes at all levels sustain connective tissue injuries during sport (such as Petr Mrazek, Aaron Rodgers, Cooper Kupp, Dre Greenlaw, and Joe Burrow), it’s evident that training work performed with the specific intent to stimulate the development of the elements of reactive strength is not commonly implemented.

Redefining Reactive Strength for Effective Connective Tissue Training

The sobering reality is that, at the time of writing, the definition of reactive strength remains inaccurate and incomplete, limiting our efforts at Absolute to have our new definition adopted (see the story above). Our new definition is more accurate and comprehensive. As you will see as we continue to outline the Absolute Conjugate System, this new definition allows strength practitioners to begin connective tissue-specific training and appropriately sequence it to achieve optimal results - Point B. While we acknowledge our bias, it's important to note that the first identification of connective tissue as trainable, biologically stress-responsive tissue with a logical strategy for stimulation occurred within the FRS ISM and continues in our work here at Absolute.

Optimizing Connective Tissue Training: Insights from the Bulgarian Method

Now that we've addressed the sad reality of connective tissue injuries resulting from athletes not meeting Point B in our definition of reactive strength, let's be optimistic. Subscribers at Absolute understand that connective tissue-specific training is essential for achieving the bottom-up biological elements of Point B reactive strength. This article will build on that foundation, expanding on how to optimally stimulate the development of connective tissue architecture and its behavior in transmitting force effectively and efficiently. To do so, we need to revisit the archives and understand what the Bulgarian Method has taught us as strength practitioners.

What the Bulgarian Method Teaches Us About Stimulating Intensity

We previously wrote an article on the Bulgarian Method, breaking down its significance to us here at Absolute. In the context of connective tissue-specific training, the article aimed to simplify the method, showing our subscribers that the Bulgarians trained the central nervous system of their lifters at a stimulating intensity daily, often multiple times a day. While we do not advocate for this frequency of performing work that stimulates the trainee’s neurology, we do advocate for this level of frequency of training the connective tissue architecture.

In the FRS ISM lecture on training intensity, it is discussed in detail that what constitutes a stimulating intensity for connective tissue architecture may not stimulate the nervous system. In other words, we are dealing with different ecologies, and the work that stimulates neurological development may not stimulate biological development in many training scenarios. This concept is not well understood but is critical to grasp if one is to effectively organize and execute connective tissue-specific training.

4 Key Takehome Points for the Strength Practitioner