The Inroad-Outroad Continuum of Exercise

Inroad

Inroad is the central theme of exercise. Although we do not know the exact stimulus mechanism of muscular growth, we are almost certain that the path to that mechanism is inroad.

Inroad is simply defined as the momentary fatigue of a muscle or muscle group when placed under a meaningful load.

And conversely, a meaningful load is defined as a continuous resistance adequate to produce inroad.

Inroad efficiency is inroad per time. Arthur Jones defined intensity as inroad per time. Hence, intensity and inroad efficiency are synonymous.

The depth of inroad is the level of strength at the end of an exercise compared to the level at the beginning of that exercise.

The concept of inroad was borne out of the explanations and writings of Arthur Jones. Perhaps others preceded Arthur with these ideas, although I do not know of these.

Inroad was coined by Ellington Darden, PhD to concisely represent Arthur’s explanations.

I defined exercise as:

A process whereby the body performs work of a demanding nature, in accordance with muscle and joint function, in a clinically controlled environment, within the constraints of safety, meaningfully loading the muscular structures to inroad their strength levels to produce a growth stimulus within minimum time.

Note the usage of inroad in this definition. I believe that, without inroad, this definition probably collapses.

Outroad

Outroad is behavior during exercise that is antithetical to inroad. Of immediate concern are inadvertent actions such as Valsalva, gripping, teeth gritting, grimacing, fidgeting, and failure to disinvolve (relax) musculatures not intentionally addressed by the exercise.

Outroad was coined by Robert Francis of Huntington, New York. It is an extremely useful term to collectively and concisely represent these immediate and inadvertent antithetical behaviors.

Outroad can further be envisioned as energy—both intellectual energy and physical energy—wasted during exercise. It is energy—rather than completely devoted to the inroad process—that is shared to counter purposes (or to no purpose at all). It is energy dispersed to atmosphere and not channeled into the effort of the exercise.

Three Antithetical Pairs

We have inroad versus outroad. This is the first and most obvious antithetical pair.

There is a second antithetical pair. Since steady state activity can be defined as activity that is deliberately and advertently performed to avoid inroad, we can see that we have inroad versus steady state. Thus, we might stretch outroading to include deliberate behavior such as steady state (while noting that the more immediate outroading concerns are usually inadvertent behaviors).

The third antithetical pair is between inroad and danger. Inroad is [almost] always low-force and thus relatively safe. And outroading tends in the direction away from relative safety and toward relative danger. The safety-danger relativity is another continuum that might be superimposed upon the inroad-outroad continuum (next section).

An Envisioned Continuum of Inroad and Outroad

The following graphic encapsulates a concept of inroad as it relates to outroad in an exercise. Of course, it can be represented in an infinite number of ways. Also, the idea is necessarily arbitrary in various aspects; however, it serves illustratively.

From left to right, a green bar represents the continuum with nine positions (P₁ through P₉) along its length. Below each position are arrows representing relative inroad (solid) and outroad (dashed).

My suggestions for each position are as follows:

P₁—static exercise performed with perfect form and complete focus.

P₂—static exercise performed some minor grimacing and gripping and some brief interludes of mind wandering

P₃—static exercise performed with exercise variation in choice and/or sequence.

P₄—dynamic exercise performed with perfect form and complete focus

P₅—dynamic exercise performed with some minor grimacing and gripping and some brief interludes of mind wandering

P₆—dynamic exercise performed with exercise variation in choice and/or sequence

P₇—dynamic exercise performed with gross grimacing, gripping, Valsalva, teeth gritting, exercise variation, socializing, multiple setting, loud music

P₈—Performing wind sprints

P₉—Long-distance jogging    

Commentary

Two years ago, at about time code, 00:27:30, I discussed two antithetical pairs in the YouTube video. Herein, I mentioned three pairs. I believe that there are more that have escaped my attention.

Among the infinite number of possible positions along the continuum, we should insert all the various sports—especially those of weightlifting and powerlifting—that are ostensibly performed for the purpose of exercise. And among those activities that are closer to our pursuits of so-called strength training, (inroad conditioning being my favorite term), we have Peary Rader’s breathing squats and Mike Mentzer’s rest pause to illustrate advertent outroading.

The Great Divide Note the dotted vertical line in the continuum. Also note that my descriptions for P₁, P₂, and P₃, are repeated—with the exception of changing static to dynamic—in P₄, P₅, and P₆. This line and the partial rehash of the descriptions is in recognition of the stark uptick in unloading that occurs once we move from static to dynamic exercise.

This uptick is of twofold cause. One of these is the significant unloading that occurs in almost all dynamic exercise apparatuses between the positive and negative excursions due to friction changes. And this friction is additive with the unavoidable friction within the body. (Bodily friction + apparatus friction = system friction). The unloading due to system friction is largely avoided with statics. [This is illustrated in Chapter 25 of my books Music and Dance and Critical Factors (essentially identical books).]

The other cause is the greatly increased onus placed on the subject to manage speed of motion, upper and lower turnaround technique, externalizing, squeeze technique, etc. This also vastly increases the responsibility of the instructor to observe and to verbalize discrepancies. All of this compounds to greatly heighten the potential for confusion and frustration culminating in a quantum uptick in outroading.

This great divide, or schism is not acknowledged by a large majority of the so-called HIT community. I am tempted to call it the invisible divide.

To my knowledge, these subjects are not discussed or studied by exercise physiologists, physical therapists, or health professionals.

Please read the free PDF Transitioning from TSC to Feedback Statics. It is also available along with additional free listings at SeriousExercise.com .

Books by Ken Hutchins