Training Muscles vs. Training Subsystems: A Complementary Approach to Performance

Training Muscles vs. Training Subsystems:

Introduction

In the world of performance and fitness, two major approaches often come together: training to improve the muscle’s ability to perform (strength, power, endurance, flexibility) and training to improve the body’s subsystems (stability, balance, coordination, movement control). While they may seem separate, the truth is that they complement each other and together create the foundation for optimal performance, health, and resilience.

⸻

Training to Improve Muscles’ Ability to Perform

When we talk about strength, power, endurance, and flexibility, we refer to the muscular qualities that allow us to generate force, sustain effort, and move efficiently.

• Strength: the ability to exert force (e.g., a heavy squat).

• Power: the ability to produce force quickly (e.g., a jump or sprint start).

• Strength endurance: the ability to maintain repeated efforts (e.g., long sets, running uphill).

• Flexibility: the range of motion that allows free and safe movement (e.g., reaching overhead).

These qualities are usually trained through progressive resistance, repetitions, and mobility work, focusing primarily on muscle fibers and neuromuscular recruitment. Research shows that strength and power training improve not only muscle force production but also neuromuscular efficiency (Suchomel et al., 2016). Similarly, flexibility training enhances joint mobility and reduces injury risk (Behm et al., 2016).

⸻

Training to Improve the Subsystems

The human body also relies on several subsystems that coordinate and stabilize movements:

• Stabilization subsystem: keeping joints aligned and posture correct.

• Neuromuscular subsystem: coordinating muscles to fire in the right sequence.

• Balance subsystem: controlling the center of gravity during dynamic movement.

• Movement control subsystem: integrating all systems for safe and efficient execution.

Functional training specifically prioritizes these subsystems. It goes beyond isolated muscle strength to train the body as a connected chain—emphasizing posture, alignment, stability, and adaptability. Research confirms that functional and stability training improve balance, coordination, and reduce injury risk in athletes and the general population (Behm & Sale, 1993; Myer et al., 2006).

⸻

The Difference Between the Two Approaches

• Muscle-focused training → develops raw physical capacity.

• Subsystem-focused training → improves control, efficiency, and injury prevention.

Both approaches serve different purposes but are deeply interrelated. A strong muscle without stability may lead to poor execution or injury; a stable subsystem without muscular strength will limit performance capacity. This aligns with the principle of integrated training: combining muscular strength with movement control ensures long-term efficiency (Clark et al., 2014).

⸻

Why Both Are Complementary

To truly optimize human performance, we need both. Training muscles builds the “engine,” while training subsystems provides the “control system” that guides and protects it.

• An athlete lifting heavy weights will benefit from subsystem training to maintain posture and avoid injury.

• A person doing functional subsystem work (e.g., balance drills, core stability) will progress faster when their muscles are strong and conditioned.

Integrating both has been shown to enhance overall performance, movement quality, and resilience (Behm & Colado, 2012).

⸻

Conclusion

Training muscles and training subsystems are not competing approaches; they are complementary. Together, they allow us to build not only stronger and more powerful bodies but also safer, more functional, and more adaptable ones.

⸻

References

• Behm, D. G., & Colado, J. C. (2012). The effectiveness of resistance training using unstable surfaces and devices for rehabilitation. International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, 7(2), 226–241.

• Behm, D. G., Chaouachi, A., Lau, P. W., & Wong, D. P. (2016). Stretching and functional performance. Journal of Sports Medicine, 46(6), 933–949. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-016-0548-6

• Behm, D. G., & Sale, D. G. (1993). Intended rather than actual movement velocity determines velocity-specific training response. Journal of Applied Physiology, 74(1), 359–368. https://doi.org/10.1152/jappl.1993.74.1.359

• Clark, M. A., Lucett, S. C., & Sutton, B. G. (2014). NASM essentials of corrective exercise training. Jones & Bartlett Publishers.

• Myer, G. D., Ford, K. R., & Hewett, T. E. (2006). Methodological approaches and rationale for training to prevent anterior cruciate ligament injuries in female athletes. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 14(5), 275–285. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0838.2004.00402.x

• Suchomel, T. J., Nimphius, S., & Stone, M. H. (2016). The importance of muscular strength in athletic performance. Sports Medicine, 46(10), 1419–1449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-016-0486-0