Sup everyone.
I'm here to answer some of the most frequent questions about the new released PHIR Liner Progression for novice lifters.
If you have any further questions, I'll be here for a while so feel free.
Q: What is the point of going to failure on the first set?
One of the major things novice programs should be able to allow, but usually don't, is autoregulation. This means, the lifter himself should be able to regulate his progression. Someone might be really strong and able to add a lot of weight on his DL easily, and someone else might be cutting and won't be able to add as much weight. So it makes no sense that those two should add the same amount of weight to the bar.
The autoregulation guarantees that the progression will be tailored to YOU, not the other way around.
Q: Won't that negatively affect my progression?
The autoregulation isn't supposed to last forever. As in, after you reach a certain point, you don't need to go to failure anymore as your progression won't be changing much.
How do you know when you've reached that point? The instructions on the picture make it really simple and easy to figure it out: Once going to failure on the first set affects the rest of the sets. Then you stop going to failure on the first set and stick to the 5 reps, since you won't need autoregulation any longer, at least for quite a while, since your weight increases are gonna be fairly linear now.
Q: Why not go to failure on the last set, like Greyskull LP?
That makes no sense. You will be exhausted by the final set, doing it to failure doesn't mean anything since you are unlikely to actually reach your AMRAP max. Since the point of going to failure is to autoregulate the progression, you are supposed to test your AMRAP max while completely rested - aka in the first set.
>>35348631
fuck off m8, you are not getting famous
Q: Why not go to failure on the Deadlifts?
The whole point of going to failure is autoregulation. However, for the Deadlift, you can autoregulate it very precisely just by your back squat progression. This makes it unnecessary to go to failure on the DL.
But the main reason is, the Deadlift can cause very debilitating injuries if done with bad form and a round spine. Going to failure on it is a bad idea for novice lifters, as they don't have enough experience to be able to maintain proper and safe form throughout exhaustion.
Q: Why no BxAxBxx week?
The main focus of the program is the big three: Squat, Deadlift, and Bench Press. So it makes sense that those lifts are trained the most.
The OverHead Press is also very important for strength development. However, it's a lift that people easily stall, specially when compared to the Bench. From experience, I found that only OHPing once per week highly reduced the chances of plateauing. Besides, you're doing the OHP 1x per week compared to 1.5x per week on SS, so it's not a drastic reduction in volume.
Not only that, but the Bench, the Skullcrushers, and the lateral raises from workout A are gonna guarantee that your OHP keeps progressing even with the lower frequency of training.
The Power Clean on workout B is a way of recovering from the Deadlifts while still training with a floor pull. Plus, it brings the benefits of increasing the power production of the lifter.
The Chinups are an assistance exercise, and would be too tiring to be performed on the days you deadlift.
Q: What if I can't do any chinups?
You should do SS to build the foundation needed for PHIR LP. So stick with that until you're strong enough.
>>35348645
>anonymous
>getting famous
Q: Why Chinups instead of Barbell Rows?
Mark Rippetoe explains the preference for Chinups over Rows on the Starting Strength book.
But basically, Chinups are a more complete exercise and lead to overall better development for the back and elbow flexors' strength and growth.
Not only that, but Chinups work muscles that are neglected during the rows. The lower traps and the triceps, for example.
This does not mean that Barbell Rows are useless or bad, though. They are great exercises. I just found that prioritizing chinups for beginners leads to better strength development and hypertrophy results. However, there are barbell rows on the intermediate PHIR program.
Q: I'm overweight and can't do chinups even though I'm fairly strong on the rest of the lifts. Can I do barbell rows?
Yeah, go for it. I was supposed to add that to the picture of the program, but ran out of space and forgot about it. I'll be looking to reformat the entire thing soon and will make sure to add that.
However, if you're overweight and can't do bodyweight chinups you can do assisted chinups. Pretty much every gym has a chinup/pullup machine, and if yours don't, you can use resistance bands. If you don't even have those, you can do negatives, use leg drive to help you pull yourself up, or do easier variations of the chinup until you're strong enough to do bodyweight ones.
Q: Can I do Barbell Rows instead of Power Cleans?
Short answer: No.
Long answer: The barbell row and the power cleans are completely different types of exercises. The row is a horizontal pull, which means the main work is done by your lats and your elbow flexors. The power clean is a floor pull, which means the main work is done by your hip extensors.
The barbell row is an alternative to the chinups, not the power clean.
Q: Are power cleans necessary? I heard they are bad for hypertrophy and strength.
That's pretty much a myth.
Power cleans will train both your speed and your power (which are pretty much the same thing, technically).
What this means?
It means that the power clean will adapt your nervous system to activate more muscle fibers as quickly as possible.
By activating more muscle fibers in a shorter period of time, you gain the following benefits for strength and hypertrophy:
- It becomes easier to not fail on a certain part of a lift
One of the main reasons you fail a certain part of a lift is because your body fails to activate as many muscle fibers as is necessary in a short period of time. By taking longer to activate a stronger contraction, your muscles become fatigued before reaching maximum strength.
By being able to produce maximum strength as quickly as possible, you will perform the lifts faster and that will both reduce the amount of fatigue induced by holding the weights, and reduce the chances of failing on certain parts of the lifts due to sub-optimal muscle contraction.
- By activating more muscle fibers, you increase the muscle effort
And by increasing the effort your muscles perform, you will increase the hypertrophy results from your training.
Basically, if you can activate and stimulate double the amount of muscle fibers compared to someone else, you are gonna have much better results when it comes to muscular adaptation - because you will be "using your muscle a lot more" than the other person.
literally a shittier ss and it even says to do ss first
just fuck off
This shit just needs to die. There are already better programs out there, for every purpose.
Q: Why do people say Power Cleans are bad for hypertrophy, then?
Basically it comes from the notion that, because the power clean lacks an eccentric phase, it doesn't provide enough muscular effort to produce a hypertrophy stimulus.
However, know what other lifts lack a proper eccentric phase?
Barbell rows (ironically enough), and Deadlifts (which have the exact same eccentric phase as the power clean).
And is very well known that those two exercises are great for building muscle mass.
Q: What muscles am I gonna grow and make stronger with Power Cleans?
The power clean uses mostly your knee extensors and posterior chain (including the hip extensors, of course), and your traps.
Those are pretty much the same muscles used for the deadlift (though the deadlift also uses other muscles besides those).
The power clean can be seen as a lighter version of the deadlift, which makes it perfect for recovering from the heavy pulling.
Q: I don't have bumper plates, I can't do Power Cleans
Listen to the words of the wise Rippletits: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_drttm5r66A
This shit is fucking stupid, even compared to all the other programs you see on /fit/
Let me see, who's opinion should I listen here?
Dude who made the program?
>>35348631
>>35348675
>>35348722
>>35348785
>>35348833
Lots of knowledge, knows what he's talking about. Explains in details every single reasoning behind the program.
Or random anonymous posters on /fit/, a board where the majority of people either don't lift or have been lifting for a few months?
>>35348645
>>35348795
>>35348810
>>35348998
Who don't have anything intelligent to add and just shitpost without any willingness to educate themselves?
Tough choice.
>>35349832
g give me your email p pls
Love, hime
>>35348631
I've got a question I never see answered. Who is this for? For people starting a power lifting career?
I'm just a decently fit 29 year old guy. Not huge, not thin. What should I do to look good and be athletic? I'm guessing not this. Not body building. Not Power lifting.
>>35349841
Sure, [email protected] :)
>>35349900
Wanna look good? That program is for you.
Wanna be strong? That program is for you.
Wanna be both? That program is for you
Wanna waste time in the gym? Not for you sorry.
Pic related is someone who did SS.
>>35348631
So if I only get 3 reps in my first set, do I continue that weight with the next two sets? How am I supposed to get 5 on the next two if I can't do it on my first set?
Please stop doing this
>>35348631
Op you here?
I wish to talk about rest time.
>>35351219
If you got 3 reps on the first set, you first gotta check your form. One of the main reasons people lose reps is bad form. Another reason is not eating/resting well enough.
However, you do NOT deload. Got 3 on the first set? Do the rest with the same weight. Then you increase less weight on the next workout and add "one failure point".
If you eat well and rest enough, and do it with proper form on the next workout, chances are you will reach at least 4 reps.
You should only ever deload if you're legitimately stuck.
Rippletits once said, when asked "what's the most common mistake you see novices making?"
>"Not adding weight to the bar."
I know it sounds weird, but when you're a novice you have a cheat code on. You adapt and get stronger really fast. Even though you missed the reps on the previous workout, you can reach the reps on this workout even though you added weight.
Just don't get greedy and start adding too much weight. The way OP wrote the autoregulation for the program is pretty good at guaranteeing you are adding the correct amount of weight.
>>35351352
Not the dude, but I can help.
When it comes to strength training and resting, the rule of thumb is "rest as long as you need".
Of course resting 10 minutes is pretty excessive for a novice, but it's not unusual to rest 4-5 minutes before the next set.
The objective here is to not miss a rep. If your sets go like 5/4/3, that means you're not resting enough between the sets (or you haven't eaten enough and don't have enough energy).
For the assistance exercises, though, resting 1-2 minutes is more than enough. It doesn't matter if you miss reps here, all it matters is muscle effort.
>>35351219
Also what is the phir black or white?
>>35351493
Cool I'll try it, don't really have anything to lose
>>35351237
>poshting zeezeyk otshide ov leet
*shniffs*
>>35351493
Were you ban evading yesterday when talking to me about rest;^)?
Whatever, I just wanted to say take a look at this video by Kiril sarychev, the all time world record bench presser.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yV9VgIwk7eU
You're gonna have to watch the entire thing because I can't remember what the time stamp was.
Basically though he talks about rest time, and the dangers of exceeding 5 minutes, which is the point I made yesterday, it is too dangerous to recommend.
While the guideline may be take as long as you need, that's out dated and crude advice that only leads to injuries and decreased work capacity.
If you're going to mimic the guidelines to starting strength then what is the point in creating another novice program?
It needs to bring something new to the table, this program just takes principles from starting strength and changes what lifts you preform. Which in turn has its own faults as the assistance choice isn't the best, or has any justification.
As well as I might add the volume for accessories is abysmal. I tend not to go to the 12 rep range myself otherwise I'm lifting too light, but 2 sets isn't enough.
Volume drives progression, 2x12xworking weight is god awful because the working weight is going to be reduced drastically due to the rep range and you're not doing enough sets to bring up the volume.
5x10 is my go to, and as a novice / transitioning intermediate lifter, 5x10 has only driven progression for me after a very long (8 month bench stall)
All that being said, you don't need so much additional volume for lowerbody, because it is easier to progress squats and deadlifts than bench and overhead press.
Pic related kinda
>>35349832
>>35351493
You're not gonna become an internet celebrity by shilling your program on /fit/, give it up.
Also, some critic on the program: It assumes that your deadlift is the same as your squat. Someone with short stubby arms, a long torso and short femurs will always be a good squatter while having a relatively worse deadlift. Someone with proportions more suited to deadlifting would probably benefit from training the deadlift more and maybe adding weight at a faster rate then in the squat.
Going to failure on the first set is almost a guarantee to make the next to suboptimal technique wise, since you're exhausting yourself meaningslessly much on the first. Going to failure on the last would be better since there is no point in constantly testing your strength, but getting more reps than prescribed on the last could serve as an indicator that the weight is easy and you could add more weight(than you normally would) if you want.
The reasoning for doing OHP once a week sucks ass. If you want to get good at a lift, you train it more, not less. Training OHP less will make it harder to progress at it. This is basic sport science, the training load goes up through an athletes career to get him to progress even he's elite.
Rows are not an alternative to chinups, they are different kind of pulls. Also rowing excercises helps against forward rolled shoulders, while lat excercises does not.
>>35351800
I agree %100 with everything you wrote, especially on rows.
>>35351594
It's for intermediate lifters. Progression is slower, volume is higher.
>>35351633
I wasn't banned yesterday and I wasn't talking to you about rest kek.
I'm not OP.
I'll watch the video when I'm home, but I'm VERY skeptical about "resting 5 minutes being bad" because that's literally what everyone does not only in my gym (and there are some pretty strong people in my gym, it's not a fitness centre), but pretty much everyone who trains for strength.
>As well as I might add the volume for accessories is abysmal. I tend not to go to the 12 rep range myself otherwise I'm lifting too light, but 2 sets isn't enough.
It's a novice program. SS doesn't even have those accessories. You don't need volume to drive progress for a beginner, it's only a useful variable for intermediate lifters (or at least beginners who have been training for a while). Give a read on Practical Programming.
I like OP's approach of adding accessories but keeping the volume low enough to not impact the recovery and impair the main lifts.
>>35351800
Why the hell do people think I made this program? lol If you check my posts on the routine threads you will see that's not usually how I program stuff.
>Someone with short stubby arms, a long torso and short femurs will always be a good squatter while having a relatively worse deadlift
I always kek at this. You have no idea what you're talking about.
First of, anatomical differences make zero difference for a novice lifter (to whom the program is aimed at).
Now, not only it makes no difference, we are talking about progression. The program does not expect your deadlift to be the same number as your squat. However, the progression on both lifts is pretty much tied together. After a month of two, everyone is gonna be adding around 2kg to their squat and DL numbers. That's just how it works. Just give a read on Rip's SS book, he has over three decades of experience coaching people and this is what he preaches.
Hanging leg raises are horrible for your posture moron
>>35351800
>Going to failure on the first set is almost a guarantee to make the next to suboptimal technique wise
So, anyone who's a novice who has been doing SS for four months or so should stop doing 5 reps and go for 4 reps because going to failure will be "suboptimal"?
Most people will fail at the 6th rep at most. This is how autoregulation works, it prevents you from suddenly doing 10 reps.
When you manage to get too many reps on the first set, to the point where it would be detrimental, the program autoregulates you to add more weight. When you add more weight, you drastically reduce the amount of reps you can do. After a couple of workouts you will find that you will reach the perfect equilibrium on the first set, where you will basically be doing 5-6 reps on every workout (until you start actually losing reps).
Again, you are criticisim something based off of zero experience or even understanding of how autoregulation works.
>Going to failure on the last would be better since there is no point in constantly testing your strength
There's no point in going to failure on the last since your failure is gonna be 5 reps or less, unless you're a very rank novice that just started lifting.
It would be completely useless for autoregulation.
>The reasoning for doing OHP once a week sucks ass. If you want to get good at a lift, you train it more, not less
This is so wrong I won't even bother to address.
>Training OHP less will make it harder to progress at it.
That's where you are wrong. You are not training the OHP less. You are pressing on every workout. Working your lateral delts on every workout. Working your triceps on every workout.
By reducing the amount of OHP you do while still pressing and training the muscles constantly, the only thing you will achieve is better progress on the lift.
Don't take my word for it, go look at advanced programs and how they do variations instead of the main exercise to drive progress.
>>35351887
wait what really??
>>35351861
>t's a novice program. SS doesn't even have those accessories. You don't need volume to drive progress for a beginner, it's only a useful variable for intermediate lifters (or at least beginners who have been training for a while).
I completely disagree. Time after time have I seen novice lifters stall overhead press and bench press on SS, then quit the program.
I was one of those people, today was the first day I benched 60kg for 3x5 (RPE7-8 - was a very good day) while currently I deadlift 142.5kg for 5 and squat 135kg for 5.
I have only recently broken my plateau on my bench press because I learnt two things
>fatigue management
>volume
It wasn't until I did 5x10 DB bench as an accessorie that I began to add 7.5kg a fortnight to my bench (SS progression)
I understand rank novices don't need this additional volume, but this program is not for rank novices as it tells you to do starting strength for at least 1 month beforehand, possibly more.
Eventually novice lifters will plateau at novice weights for pressing movements, it's a historical issue for these internet program lifters.
Bro lifters bench a decent amount (not a lot in the grand scheme of things) because they come into the gym doing high volume programs.
Bench and OHP really do feed off high volume, it is detrimental to progression.
I can not stress enough how important accessories work is, it should compliment training not distract from if.
And that's why I dislike this program, the accessorie work distracts from the program, the only decent thing in there is skull crushers, because that will add to your total (although mark rippetoes lying tricep extensions are superior)
Except that won't add to your total or gain much muscle because the volume is worse than what's gained in the 3x5 bench press 1.5x a week, WHICH ISNT ENOUGH to drive progression for a lot of lifters.
It has become very rare for a novice to finish SS with a bench press over 100kilo, because they lack assistance volume.
>>35351949
How should I progress as a begginer when my gym doesn't have 2.5lbs weights? Currently im increasing weight by 10lbs when i can do 7 reps with lower weight
>>35351949
As for rest times, kiril lifts very heavy so of course he runs a greater risk of injury if he doesn't remain warmed up.
However waiting over 5 minutes is simply bad practise for novice lifters, and UNNECESSARY, and the risk of injury is still there despite the edit they're lifting,
>>35351963
Yes, but just stretch the entirety of your lower body and you'll be fine.
All muscles get tighter as they grow and get stronger, bench gives you rolled forward shoulder but that isn't an issue if you train back.
>>35351861
>I always kek at this. You have no idea what you're talking about.
>First of, anatomical differences make zero difference for a novice lifter (to whom the program is aimed at).
Why do you think some lifts come naturally to some people and other have to bend over backwards to do a deadlift?
>>35351861
>Now, not only it makes no difference, we are talking about progression. The program does not expect your deadlift to be the same number as your squat. However, the progression on both lifts is pretty much tied together. After a month of two, everyone is gonna be adding around 2kg to their squat and DL numbers.
Hot opinions, buzzwords, etc. The deadlift and the squat are two separate movements and need to be treated as such. They train the same muscles to an extent, but same is true for OHP and bench. No one is going to become a good deadlifter by neglecting the deadlift, altough the squat has SOME carry-over.
>Just give a read on Rip's SS book, he has over three decades of experience coaching people and this is what he preaches.
>M-muh Rippetoe
Can you please link me to ONE succesfull strength athlete that Rippetoe has coached?
>>35351861
>Why the hell do people think I made this program? lol
Because you shill it?
>>35351800
>This is basic sport science, the training load goes up through an athletes career to get him to progress even he's elite.
You're wrong.
There's a difference between strength training and sports training.
A pretty big difference.
Sports training relies on repetition in order to optimize technique.
Strength training works completely different.
Just take a look at olympic lifter's routines. They do more variations than main exercises.
Read Practical Programming if you want to understand how things work.
>Rows are not an alternative to chinups, they are different kind of pulls.
Horizontal pull and vertical pull. The differences are very few.
>Also rowing excercises helps against forward rolled shoulders, while lat excercises does not.
This is so wrong. The two exercises work the same muscle groups. The exact same. In almost the entire same way.
The traps and the lats will act on the shoulders the same way in both exercises.
>>35351983
>I completely disagree. Time after time have I seen novice lifters stall overhead press and bench press on SS, then quit the program.
You're not arguing with me then, you're arguing with pretty much every coach who wrote successful programs for novice lifters.
If you wanna have this fight, go after Rippetoe on his forums. I won't bother.
>I was one of those people, today was the first day I benched 60kg for 3x5 (RPE7-8 - was a very good day) while currently I deadlift 142.5kg for 5 and squat 135kg for 5.
Oh, I see.
So you're a beginner.
Makes sense.
Alright, first thing you gotta realise is: You do not know enough. You know very little, in fact. Experience will show you many of the things you thought are right are actually wrong.
If you wanna improve your knowledge and your progression, I really suggest you go after and read the books for novice and intermediate lifters.
>It has become very rare for a novice to finish SS with a bench press over 100kilo
Citation needed.
>>35351983
>>35351949
>today was the first day I benched 60kg for 3x5 (RPE7-8 - was a very good day) while currently I deadlift 142.5kg for 5 and squat 135kg for 5.
You are arguing with a novice, trappy, stop taking the bait. I've seen novice say all kinds of retarded things and argue all day about how they're actually right.
Ignore and move on, he will learn some day.
>>35352001
I'll look at the video when I'm home later, so we can discuss this better. I'm leaving for the cinema atm. :(
>>35352042
I'm ashamed of you trappy, instead of listening to my experiences you play the easy route of trying to discard my thoughts because of the amount I lift.
Knowledge isn't directly proportional to weight lifted, need I remind you that you're like some 90lbs trap who doesn't even lift?
Pic related are the books I own and have read.
Literally NO professional coaches other than these vague Internet programs take this linear 3x5, low volume, approach.
This is an Internet fad and not the only way to train.
I can see all your knowledge ranges from these internet programs so I guess there's not much I can expect from you.
Starting strength is not the best novice program out there, it's a mediocre internet program that vaguely works for most people.
>>35351983
>I was one of those people, today was the first day I benched 60kg for 3x5 (RPE7-8 - was a very good day) while currently I deadlift 142.5kg for 5 and squat 135kg for 5.
Everytime
Every single time
I see someone shitposting
I see someone spouting out wrong info as fact
I see someone arguing with someone else who knows what they are talking about
Every single time
It's a beginner.
>>35352187
You're wrong. Volume drives progression, I have not stated anything new or revolutionary.
Just because you disagree with me, doesn't make me wrong.
You've offered no rebuttal or explanation of how I could possibly be wrong.
You're a fucking child, grow up.
>>35351949
>So, anyone who's a novice who has been doing SS for four months or so should stop doing 5 reps and go for 4 reps because going to failure will be "suboptimal"?
Anyone who fails the first set on SS should not be on SS(assuming no sickness etc). And yes, not going to failure is always better than going to failure.
>Autoregulation
I'm still against the idea of going to failure on the first set, I've already stated why.
>There's no point in going to failure on the last since your failure is gonna be 5 reps or less, unless you're a very rank novice that just started lifting.
>It would be completely useless for autoregulation.
No. Let's assume the trainee gets five reps in the last set, then he adds his original amount of weight(X). If he gets 8 reps, he adds X+2,5 or X+5. If he gets less than 5 reps, he has stalled(as your lord Rippetoe has proclaimed). The goal is to train, not to stroke your dick and add a lot of weight fast so you can stall faster.
>This is so wrong I won't even bother to address.
Suck a dick
>Don't take my word for it, go look at advanced programs and how they do variations instead of the main exercise to drive progress.
If we take Sheiko or the Norweigan method as examples, the variations utilised are close variations(partial deadlifts, squats with another stance etc.). A lift is not different muscles working one and one, it's your whole body working as a chain and training the lift is a big part in getting good at it.
>>35352187
Knowledge is quicker learned than weight added to the bar.
>>35352133
>>35351983
>>35352217
Listen, there's nothing wrong with being a beginner.
Everyone was there at some point.
But you are a beginner. Be more humble, argue less, learn more. Accept that you can be wrong.
Because you are very wrong in many points throughout all your posts.
Not your fault, everyone has been wrong at some point. Including Trappy, rippetoe, pendlay, wendler. Hell, wendler to this day and age still releases new books to correct the things he was wrong about. Rippetoe completely re-wrote the third edition of SS because he was wrong.
You are not an expert yet. You have no coaching experience. All you have is your own personal experience. Hell, you don't even understand much of biomechanics and anatomy (if you want to read a book: https://books.google.com/books?id=THXfHT8L5MEC&pg=PA25&lpg=PA25&dq=Non-spanning+Muscle+Fiber&source=bl&ots=Hae6r59NCN&sig=AkPZo8uED5aXXrvsCAgT3x8WB2g&hl=pt-BR&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjXiICugbvJAhUPnZAKHahCCuIQ6AEIXTAG#v=onepage&q=Non-spanning%20Muscle%20Fiber&f=false)
And guess what? One person's experience is not in any way the rule of thumb to what works and what doesn't.
>>35352217
Not that guy but
>Volume drives progression
It's sub-optimal for beginner programs.
Novice lifters can reliably drive strength progression in the 5 rep range.
This has the added benefit of not fatiguing novice lifters during sets. If novice lifters were doing compound lifts in the 8-12 rep range, their form would fall apart.
This is why every decent beginner program has low volume.
Once you max out your novice gains though, you need volume to progress.
>>35352265
The thing is, no one wants to spend hours trying to educate a novice who's wrong but is pretty sure he's completely right and knows better. Specially because the result from trying that is the novice will just shut his ears and refuse to accept what he's wrong about.
That's why you were dismissed by trappy.
>>35352042
>You're wrong.
>There's a difference between strength training and sports training.
>A pretty big difference.
>
>Sports training relies on repetition in order to optimize technique.
>
>Strength training works completely different.
http://sheiko-program.ru/the-basics-of-sheiko-by-robert-frederick
>Just take a look at olympic lifter's routines. They do more variations than main exercises.
I'm not against doing variations, but the training load always go up through any athletes career. And olympic lifters are extremely technically proficient, they do the competition lifts several times in a week, and they always have a defined purpose with the variations. And the variations are often parts of the competition lifts.
Also, lats =/= rhomboids.
>>35352341
Weight on the bar isn't the only way to measure progress, especially if you're going to compete in a sport.
>This is why every decent beginner program has low volume.
You mean american beginner programs. Beginner programs from other schools of thought are also low volume, but SS isn't the standard
>>35352133
I'm not discarding your thoughts or dismissing you, I just reached the character limit to that post.
I have to leave now but we can talk more later. Kisses.
white vs black, what's the difference?
>>35352316
Thanks for the book, but how am I wrong?
Let's summarise what I said to make it easier to talk about.
>More volume drives progression
That's the summery in 4 words. Which is a true statement, you can not progress without increasing volume, it's impossible,
However I took it one step further to claim that SS, a vague internet program fad, lacks volume in its basic form and that you need to supplement with assistance exercises to obtain more volume to drive progression.
Which is also true, the premise of the program is to increase your the weight you lift for 3x5, doing just 3x5 won't increase your 3x5 for long.
And notoriously novice lifters stall early on upper body lifts, and not so much lower body lifts because of lack of upper body volume.
Which is true, and I used myself as an example,
Here's my 1RMs:
160kg deadlift
155kg squat
72.5kg bench
The squat is the lift I trained most, it had the most volume, therefore it's my greatest lift, not proportionate to the other 2.
I didn't progress bench until I gained volume from assistance lifts.
Which is what any professional coach would do for their trainers.
After watching plenty of videos from famous IPF world champion lifters, and a few lolfedders I noticed a tend in how they train the bench press
V O L U M E, so I mimicked that and guess what? After 8 months my bench has finally started to profess once more.
Without going into further depth to distract from the point, I have not said anything new or revolutionary, I have pointed a flat in your program; lack of volume.
SS has assistance lifts that you add to the program, if you choose wisely you wind stall.
The accessories, and I use that word purposely, have no use to drive progression.
>>35352341
>claims I'm a novice
>posts this
Increasing your 5RM is increasing volume.
I'm talking about the sticking point I often see /fit/ anions complain about, the same plateau I've experienced.
Such plateaus can be broken with increasing volume, increasing volume makes the muscle bigger, that's the easiest way you can progress.
Even advanced lifters such as Kiril or Geroge leeman DO EXACTLY THAT.
THEY MAKE THE MUSCLE BIGGER SO THEY CAN LIFT MORE.
OPs novice program misses exactly that.
You can NOT run this program for long, which is why it is shit.
>>35352372
You're a fool, hiding behind the word "novice" to make up for lack of rebuttal and misinformation.
>>35352395
>http://sheiko-program.ru/the-basics-of-sheiko-by-robert-frederick
I hope you understand that Sheiko works very closely with his athletes and that's why he is able to apply his special method of training to them.
If you think Sheiko is right about everything and try to follow the stuff he writes for his trainees, you're gonna fail pretty hard.
I honestly doubt you've read Practical Programming.
>>35352430
Holy fucking hell, it's worse than I thought.
And I'm not even talking about your numbers.
You simply have no idea how programming and progression works.
>>35352526
You're a fucking retard, at least you made it obvious I'm being lead on.
>>35352526
If you disagree with any of what I have said then you disagree with George leeman.
This guy must know nothing:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=19FXJ2rUenM
>>35352502
>I hope you understand that Sheiko works very closely with his athletes and that's why he is able to apply his special method of training to them.
What you're saying is basically that doing many reps with good technique is bad. What you're saying is basically that Sheiko is a magical god that alters the physique of anyone who's near him, to the point where it doesn't resemble a normal human being. Sheiko is grounded in sport science and experience, this is no "special method".
Did you even read the link? There is nothing in it about personal coaching. Also, Sheikos personal coaching doesn't look anything like his stuff on the internet. Those are templates, made for the general public.
Jesus, this is like saying that SS doesn't work unless you're coached personally by Rip.
>I honestly doubt you've read Practical Programming.
I doubt that you have read anything other than Practical Programming. /fit/ is religiously repellant of anything that doesn't have a Mark Rippetoe stamp of approval on it.
