Applying Accommodating Resistance in Strength and Power Development
Show Notes & Resources
This episode breaks down accommodating resistance and the role of bands and chains in modern strength and conditioning programs. The discussion centers on how traditional barbell loading applies constant resistance despite changing force capabilities throughout a lift, and how accommodating resistance attempts to resolve that mismatch. The physiological and mechanical differences between bands and chains are explained, including how each alters force production, velocity, and intent. Practical applications are covered in detail, from dynamic effort training and peak power loading to max effort work and overload strategies. The episode also addresses common setup mistakes that change the training effect and reduce the value of these tools. Ultimately, this is a framework for understanding when accommodating resistance is useful, when it is unnecessary, and how to apply it with precision.
Key Topics Covered:
This episode explores the relationship between strength curves and external loading, the concept of accommodating resistance, and the historical influence of Westside Barbell on modern programming. It examines how bands and chains differ mechanically and how those differences influence training outcomes. The discussion also covers movement selection based on strength curves, proper setup for both bands and chains, and how these tools are integrated into dynamic effort and max effort methods. Emphasis is placed on intent, force production, and the importance of aligning loading strategies with training goals.
Relevant Science & Articles Mentioned:
- Cormie, P., McGuigan, M.R. & Newton, R.U. Developing Maximal Neuromuscular Power. Sports Med 41, 17–38 (2011). https://doi.org/10.2165/11537690-000000000-00000
- Suchomel TJ, Nimphius S, Stone MH. The Importance of Muscular Strength in Athletic Performance. Sports Med. 2016;46(10):1419-1449. doi:10.1007/s40279-016-0486-0
- Jensen L, Djurtoft JB, Bech RD, et al. Influence of Resistance Training on Neuromuscular Function and Physical Capacity in ALS Patients. J Neurodegener Dis. 2017;2017:1436519. doi:10.1155/2017/1436519
- Newton RU, Kraemer WJ, Häkkinen K. Effects of ballistic training on preseason preparation of elite volleyball players. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1999;31(2):323-330. doi:10.1097/00005768-199902000-00017
Products, Tools, or Resources Mentioned:
- EliteFTS EZ Loaders (Deadlift) (Bench Press & Squat)
- Spud Inc Straps
- Spud Inc 5/8 in Chain
- Rogue Fitness Monster Bands
Time Stamps
(00:00) Introduction and why accommodating resistance matters
(02:00) Constant load versus changing force production and strength curves
(04:15) How accommodating resistance changes loading and velocity
(05:40) Origins in Westside Barbell and dynamic effort training
(08:55) Chains versus bands key differences
(12:00) Programming intent and when to use each tool
(13:00) Movement selection and strength curve alignment
(15:05) Setup mistakes and why details matter
(15:40) Proper chain setup and loading principles
(17:20) Proper band setup, tension, and anchoring
(20:30) Programming applications and transition to loading
(20:50) Peak power and optimal loading ranges
(21:35) Dynamic effort examples for squat and bench
(23:10) Chains for max effort and strength work
(24:20) Integrating strength and power in programming
(25:55) Practical use and when these tools are not necessary
(26:30) Closing thoughts and where to find research
Transcript
00:00–02:00
Why Accommodating Resistance Exists
This opening section frames the purpose of accommodating resistance and separates necessity from utility. The key idea is that bands and chains are not required to build strength, but they exist to solve a specific limitation within traditional barbell training. That distinction keeps the conversation grounded in function rather than novelty.
At a mechanical level, traditional barbell training applies a constant external load regardless of joint position or leverage. The body does not produce force uniformly across a range of motion, which creates a mismatch between external resistance and internal capability.
From a training standpoint, this matters because loading is typically constrained by the weakest portion of a lift. Stronger positions are underloaded by default. Accommodating resistance offers a way to redistribute that stimulus more effectively across the full range of motion.
00:02:00–04:15
Strength Curves and Force Expression
This section introduces ascending strength curves, which underpin nearly all practical applications of accommodating resistance. Most compound lifts become mechanically more favorable as the lifter approaches lockout, allowing for greater force production.
Physiologically, this reflects changes in joint angles, muscle length-tension relationships, and moment arms. As leverage improves, the same musculature can produce greater torque with less relative strain. This is a predictable and repeatable pattern across major barbell lifts.
In practice, this explains why lifters tend to fail in consistent positions. It also highlights a limitation of straight-weight training, where the load is dictated by the weakest position rather than the strongest.
Reference
Suchomel TJ, Nimphius S, Stone MH (2016). The importance of muscular strength in athletic performance. Sports Medicine. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26474869/
00:04:15–05:40
Load Distribution and Barbell Velocity
This portion expands into the velocity component of lifting. In traditional barbell movements, lifters must decelerate near lockout to maintain control. This creates a natural drop in force production toward the end of the movement.
Accommodating resistance alters this dynamic by increasing load as the bar rises. Instead of coasting into lockout, the lifter must continue producing force throughout the entire range. This reduces the deceleration phase and maintains higher force output.
From a performance perspective, this becomes highly relevant for power development. Power depends on both force and velocity, and premature deceleration reduces the effectiveness of the stimulus.
Reference
Cormie P, McGuigan MR, Newton RU (2011). Developing maximal neuromuscular power: Part 1 and 2. Sports Medicine. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21395365/
00:05:40–08:55
Historical Context and the Conjugate Influence
This section situates accommodating resistance within the evolution of strength training, particularly through Westside Barbell and the conjugate method. The system emphasized developing multiple physical qualities simultaneously, including maximal strength and rate of force development.
From a programming perspective, this represented a move away from purely linear progression toward a more concurrent model. Dynamic effort work required tools that could reinforce speed and force production throughout the lift.
The practical takeaway is that accommodating resistance emerged as a solution to a programming problem. Its value depends on whether that same problem exists within a given training context.
00:08:55–12:00
Chains vs Bands: Mechanical and Neuromuscular Differences
This section highlights the key distinction between chains and bands. Chains modify the load curve in a gradual, linear manner, increasing resistance as more chain lifts off the ground. This preserves the natural feel of the lift while shifting load toward stronger positions.
Bands create a steeper resistance curve due to elastic tension. They also introduce an active eccentric component by pulling the bar downward. This increases the demand for control and reinforces aggressive force production throughout the lift.
From a neuromuscular standpoint, bands require greater intent and sustained acceleration. Chains allow acceleration but do not force it in the same way. This difference is critical when selecting tools for specific training goals.
Reference
Lake JP, Lauder MA (2012). Kinetics of variable resistance training. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22158148/
00:12:00–13:00
Programming Intent and Tool Selection
This section connects mechanical differences to programming decisions. Bands and chains are often grouped together, but they are not interchangeable tools.
Programming requires alignment between stimulus and outcome. Chains tend to align with maximal strength work by allowing overload in stronger positions. Bands align more closely with speed and power work by reinforcing acceleration under submaximal loads.
This distinction matters because mismatching tool and intent reduces the effectiveness of the training stimulus. The value of accommodating resistance depends on how well it is integrated into the broader program.
00:13:00–15:05
Movement Selection and Strength Curve Alignment
This section addresses where accommodating resistance is appropriate. The key principle is that resistance should increase where the lifter is strongest.
Movements with ascending strength curves, such as squats, presses, and many deadlift variations, align well with this approach. Increasing resistance toward lockout matches the body’s natural force capabilities.
In contrast, movements with descending or bell-shaped strength curves do not benefit from accommodating resistance. Increasing load in mechanically disadvantaged positions can disrupt movement quality and reduce effectiveness.
This reinforces the importance of exercise selection when applying variable resistance methods.
00:15:05–17:20
Chain Setup and Load Distribution
This section focuses on the practical implementation of chains. Proper setup requires that a portion of the chain rests on the floor at the bottom of the lift.
Mechanically, this ensures reduced load in weaker positions and progressively increased load as the lifter moves upward. If the chain is fully suspended, the system behaves like constant resistance rather than accommodating resistance.
From a training standpoint, setup determines outcome. Improper configuration changes the resistance profile and eliminates the intended benefit.
00:17:20–20:30
Band Setup, Tension, and Stability
Bands require more precise setup due to their elastic properties. The most important factor is that tension should be minimal but present at the bottom and increase progressively through the lift.
Excessive tension at the bottom shifts the resistance curve upward and overloads the weakest position. This changes both the mechanical and neuromuscular demands of the movement.
Consistency in setup is also critical. Variations in anchor point or band tension introduce variability into the stimulus, making progression less reliable.
The broader implication is that small setup errors can significantly alter training outcomes when using bands.
00:20:30–23:10
Power Development and Dynamic Effort Loading
This section introduces the relationship between load and power output. Peak power is typically achieved at moderate loads, reflecting a balance between force and velocity.
Dynamic effort training leverages this by using submaximal loads moved with maximal intent. The goal is to maximize speed and force production rather than fatigue.
Accommodating resistance enhances this by allowing acceleration through the full range while still providing meaningful resistance at lockout. This creates a more complete power stimulus compared to straight-weight training.
Reference
Cormie P, McGuigan MR, Newton RU (2011). Developing maximal neuromuscular power: Part 1 and 2. Sports Medicine. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21395365/
00:23:10–25:55
Integrating Strength and Power in Programming
This section integrates previous concepts into a broader framework. Strength and power exist on a continuum, and effective programming develops both.
Chains allow targeted overload during heavy work, while bands reinforce acceleration during speed-focused sessions. Together, they provide a way to train across different force-velocity demands without changing movement patterns.
The practical implication is that accommodating resistance offers more precise control over how force is expressed. Its effectiveness depends on how well it aligns with overall training goals.
00:25:55–End
Limitations and Practical Application
The final section reinforces that accommodating resistance is optional. Strength and power can be developed effectively with traditional loading methods.
These tools provide added specificity, but they are not required. When used correctly, they refine load distribution and force expression. When used unnecessarily, they add complexity without benefit.
This reflects a broader principle in training. Tools do not produce results on their own. The outcome is determined by how well they are applied within a structured program.
Transcript
00:00–02:00
Why Accommodating Resistance Exists
This opening section frames the purpose of accommodating resistance and separates necessity from utility. The key idea is that bands and chains are not required to build strength, but they exist to solve a specific limitation within traditional barbell training. That distinction keeps the conversation grounded in function rather than novelty.
At a mechanical level, traditional barbell training applies a constant external load regardless of joint position or leverage. The body does not produce force uniformly across a range of motion, which creates a mismatch between external resistance and internal capability.
From a training standpoint, this matters because loading is typically constrained by the weakest portion of a lift. Stronger positions are underloaded by default. Accommodating resistance offers a way to redistribute that stimulus more effectively across the full range of motion.
00:02:00–04:15
Strength Curves and Force Expression
This section introduces ascending strength curves, which underpin nearly all practical applications of accommodating resistance. Most compound lifts become mechanically more favorable as the lifter approaches lockout, allowing for greater force production.
Physiologically, this reflects changes in joint angles, muscle length-tension relationships, and moment arms. As leverage improves, the same musculature can produce greater torque with less relative strain. This is a predictable and repeatable pattern across major barbell lifts.
In practice, this explains why lifters tend to fail in consistent positions. It also highlights a limitation of straight-weight training, where the load is dictated by the weakest position rather than the strongest.
Reference
Suchomel TJ, Nimphius S, Stone MH (2016). The importance of muscular strength in athletic performance. Sports Medicine. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26474869/
00:04:15–05:40
Load Distribution and Barbell Velocity
This portion expands into the velocity component of lifting. In traditional barbell movements, lifters must decelerate near lockout to maintain control. This creates a natural drop in force production toward the end of the movement.
Accommodating resistance alters this dynamic by increasing load as the bar rises. Instead of coasting into lockout, the lifter must continue producing force throughout the entire range. This reduces the deceleration phase and maintains higher force output.
From a performance perspective, this becomes highly relevant for power development. Power depends on both force and velocity, and premature deceleration reduces the effectiveness of the stimulus.
Reference
Cormie P, McGuigan MR, Newton RU (2011). Developing maximal neuromuscular power: Part 1 and 2. Sports Medicine. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21395365/
00:05:40–08:55
Historical Context and the Conjugate Influence
This section situates accommodating resistance within the evolution of strength training, particularly through Westside Barbell and the conjugate method. The system emphasized developing multiple physical qualities simultaneously, including maximal strength and rate of force development.
From a programming perspective, this represented a move away from purely linear progression toward a more concurrent model. Dynamic effort work required tools that could reinforce speed and force production throughout the lift.
The practical takeaway is that accommodating resistance emerged as a solution to a programming problem. Its value depends on whether that same problem exists within a given training context.
00:08:55–12:00
Chains vs Bands: Mechanical and Neuromuscular Differences
This section highlights the key distinction between chains and bands. Chains modify the load curve in a gradual, linear manner, increasing resistance as more chain lifts off the ground. This preserves the natural feel of the lift while shifting load toward stronger positions.
Bands create a steeper resistance curve due to elastic tension. They also introduce an active eccentric component by pulling the bar downward. This increases the demand for control and reinforces aggressive force production throughout the lift.
From a neuromuscular standpoint, bands require greater intent and sustained acceleration. Chains allow acceleration but do not force it in the same way. This difference is critical when selecting tools for specific training goals.
Reference
Lake JP, Lauder MA (2012). Kinetics of variable resistance training. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22158148/
00:12:00–13:00
Programming Intent and Tool Selection
This section connects mechanical differences to programming decisions. Bands and chains are often grouped together, but they are not interchangeable tools.
Programming requires alignment between stimulus and outcome. Chains tend to align with maximal strength work by allowing overload in stronger positions. Bands align more closely with speed and power work by reinforcing acceleration under submaximal loads.
This distinction matters because mismatching tool and intent reduces the effectiveness of the training stimulus. The value of accommodating resistance depends on how well it is integrated into the broader program.
00:13:00–15:05
Movement Selection and Strength Curve Alignment
This section addresses where accommodating resistance is appropriate. The key principle is that resistance should increase where the lifter is strongest.
Movements with ascending strength curves, such as squats, presses, and many deadlift variations, align well with this approach. Increasing resistance toward lockout matches the body’s natural force capabilities.
In contrast, movements with descending or bell-shaped strength curves do not benefit from accommodating resistance. Increasing load in mechanically disadvantaged positions can disrupt movement quality and reduce effectiveness.
This reinforces the importance of exercise selection when applying variable resistance methods.
00:15:05–17:20
Chain Setup and Load Distribution
This section focuses on the practical implementation of chains. Proper setup requires that a portion of the chain rests on the floor at the bottom of the lift.
Mechanically, this ensures reduced load in weaker positions and progressively increased load as the lifter moves upward. If the chain is fully suspended, the system behaves like constant resistance rather than accommodating resistance.
From a training standpoint, setup determines outcome. Improper configuration changes the resistance profile and eliminates the intended benefit.
00:17:20–20:30
Band Setup, Tension, and Stability
Bands require more precise setup due to their elastic properties. The most important factor is that tension should be minimal but present at the bottom and increase progressively through the lift.
Excessive tension at the bottom shifts the resistance curve upward and overloads the weakest position. This changes both the mechanical and neuromuscular demands of the movement.
Consistency in setup is also critical. Variations in anchor point or band tension introduce variability into the stimulus, making progression less reliable.
The broader implication is that small setup errors can significantly alter training outcomes when using bands.
00:20:30–23:10
Power Development and Dynamic Effort Loading
This section introduces the relationship between load and power output. Peak power is typically achieved at moderate loads, reflecting a balance between force and velocity.
Dynamic effort training leverages this by using submaximal loads moved with maximal intent. The goal is to maximize speed and force production rather than fatigue.
Accommodating resistance enhances this by allowing acceleration through the full range while still providing meaningful resistance at lockout. This creates a more complete power stimulus compared to straight-weight training.
Reference
Cormie P, McGuigan MR, Newton RU (2011). Developing maximal neuromuscular power: Part 1 and 2. Sports Medicine. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21395365/
00:23:10–25:55
Integrating Strength and Power in Programming
This section integrates previous concepts into a broader framework. Strength and power exist on a continuum, and effective programming develops both.
Chains allow targeted overload during heavy work, while bands reinforce acceleration during speed-focused sessions. Together, they provide a way to train across different force-velocity demands without changing movement patterns.
The practical implication is that accommodating resistance offers more precise control over how force is expressed. Its effectiveness depends on how well it aligns with overall training goals.
00:25:55–End
Limitations and Practical Application
The final section reinforces that accommodating resistance is optional. Strength and power can be developed effectively with traditional loading methods.
These tools provide added specificity, but they are not required. When used correctly, they refine load distribution and force expression. When used unnecessarily, they add complexity without benefit.
This reflects a broader principle in training. Tools do not produce results on their own. The outcome is determined by how well they are applied within a structured program.
