Go Back   Bodybuilding Forum - Bodybuilding.net > Bodybuilding Forum > Training

Mark Rippetoe Q&A Forum

Training discussion on Mark Rippetoe Q&A Forum, within the Bodybuilding Forum; ok, so a certain website i post on has this section for mark rippetoe to reply questions to. SO, i ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-02-2007, 12:59 PM   #1
_Wolf_
Rank: Light Heavyweight
Experience: 5-7 Years
 
_Wolf_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Trinity University, San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 4,790
Country:

Gender:
Send a message via MSN to _Wolf_
Default Mark Rippetoe Q&A Forum

ok, so a certain website i post on has this section for mark rippetoe to reply questions to.

SO, i thought i would put those questions out here with his answers for y'all to read

Quote:
Originally Posted by Protobuilder
f you have time, I'd be interested in your thoughts to any or all of the following:

(1) Rumor has it you can add 100 pounds to any able-bodied man’s squat. Have you seen a difference in the speed and amount of linear progress possible between, say, a “good” and “not-so-good” trainee? If so, what factors play into it? Does it just come down to coaching (e.g., there are no “not so good” trainees, just poor programs)?

(2) Some have questioned the hypertrophy recommendation in Practical Programming of multiple sets of 15. Care to elaborate/defend? I ask because many tout 5x5-style training as a “guaranteed” size builder, the thought being, you simply can’t expect big muscular legs until you’re squatting 20x315, 5x495, etc.

(3) Care to share your thoughts (if any) on the value of rack work (e.g., heavy partial squat lockouts in the rack, “bottom-up” work from the rack, etc.)?

(4) How do you define “hard work” in training terms, and what role does it play in week-to-week training?

(5) Do you have thoughts on how much time a trainee should spend in the 50-70% range? 70-80%? 80-90? Etc. (using whatever percentages or guidelines you use, if any). What factors play into this?

(6) Who has a bigger squat, Paul Anderson or God?


Thanks for the time. Looking forward to your next book.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe
1.) There are huge differences in genetic/psychological potential between people. Some have good levers, some have a short attention span, some have lots of time and no job to finance their protein habit, and some want it worse than others. A shitty program might work much better for a gifted athlete than even the best program would for me. It might come down to coaching, but lots of people get strong without a coach. It usually comes down to the individual.

2.) It is well established that higher reps build hypertrophy better than lower reps. That having been said, or typed I suppose, 5s pull up the weight that can be used on 15s, and 15s contribute hypertrophy that improves the leverage for the 5s. But you're right, big legs are a function of big weight, no defense necessary.

3.) There is an extensive discussion of this topic in the new book, now due out in early September.

4.) "Hard work" is the kind of work that committed lifters do all the time - week to week, day to day, month to month, and year to year. Rah-rah. Think of a more specific question.

5.) I guess that would depend on the program, the contest being trained for, the level of advancement of the athlete, and the time available for preparing for the meet.

6.) There is no god but John Kuc.
NEXT.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lifting N Tx
Mark, I've read the article that you wrote for the Crossfit Journal on deadlifting. Your conclusion on deadlift starting position was that 3 things were critical:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe Deadlift Article
1) The back must be locked in extension.
2) The bar must be touching the shins, with the feet
flat on the floor.
3) The shoulders must be out in front of the bar so
that the shoulder blades are directly above the bar.
I have, however, seen credible advocacy of an addtional criteria--back angle of at least 30 degrees from the horizontal.

Here is a quote from a discussion on another forum regarding this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by _Dominik_
Here's how Zatsiorsky explains it: "When the body is inclined forward, the activity of muscles that extend the spinal column increases at first; then, with a deeper lean, this activity almost disappears. The ligaments and fascia of the back assume the load here. Since they are close to the axis of rotation, they should generate considerable force to counteract the forces of gravity moment. Here, the pressure on the intervertebral discs is very high."
The original discussion is here, in case anyone wants to see it in context.

Since I am one who seems to be strongest with a pretty flat back angle, I have wondered how accurate the idea that a much greater stress gets applied to ligaments, fascia, and perhaps vertebrae at flatter back angles is. Particularly, is it the case even if the back is kept flat and not rounded?

Any thoughts on this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe
The back angle will be determined by these criteria, and expressed differently for each lifter due to individual anthropometry. The vast majority of all human beings will in fact have an angle between 30 and 45 degrees from horizontal.
I can't imagine why he thinks that connective tissue becomes more critical than muscle, and his statement that "they (ligaments and fascia) should generate considerable force to counteract the forces of gravity moment" is interesting, because there I was always thinking that muscles generated force while connective tissue just holds things together. Maybe if I was Russian I'd understand.

I have recently done an interview with Craig Rasmussen in which this is discussed at length. Watch for it on elitefts.com
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicanerous View Post
I found the following squat program over on Mike's Gym tucked away in a spread sheet with your name attached to it, but couldn't find any more information about it on the internet or in your books. I gave it a run and put about 25 lbs on my max back squat.

Is it your program?

If so, what's the training context around it? What do you recommend for testing at the end of the program? Where in a training cycle would you use it?

I worked the program on a M-W-F schedule and noticed that my performance would be great on M, drop considerably on W, and then I would feel phenomenal on F. On M, I kept rest in the 2-2.5 minute range between sets. On W, I treated the FSQ like speed work and kept the rest short in the 30-60 second range. On F, I lengthened rest to the 3-4 minute range.

Thanks,

Adam.

Quote:
Rippetoe Squat

WEEK 1
1. BSQ 5 x 5 @ 70%
2. FSQ 6 x 2-3 @ 65%
3. BSQ 6 x 1 @ 90%

WEEK 2
4. BSQ 5 x 5 @ 73%
5. FSQ 6 x 2-3 @ 65%
6. BSQ 6 x 1 @ 91%

WEEK 3
7. BSQ 5 x 5 @ 75%
8. FSQ 6 x 2-3 @ 67%
9. BSQ 6 x 1 @ 92%

WEEK 4
10. BSQ 5 x 5 @ 77%
11. FSQ 6 x 2-3 @ 67%
12. BSQ 6 x 1 @ 93%

WEEK 5
13. BSQ 5 x 5 @ 79%
14. FSQ 6 x 2-3 @ 67%
15. BSQ 6 x 1 @ 93%

WEEK 6
16. BSQ 5 x 5 @ 81%
17. FSQ 6 x 2-3 @ 67%
18. BSQ 6 x 1 @ 93%

WEEK 7
19. BSQ 5 x 5 @ 83%
20. FSQ 6 x 2-3 @ 66%
21. BSQ 6 x 1 @ 94%

WEEK 8
22. BSQ 5 x 5 @ 85%
23. FSQ 6 x 2-3 @ 64%
24. BSQ 6 x 1 @ 94%

WEEK 9
25. BSQ 5 x 5 @ 87%
26. FSQ 6 x 2-3 @ 62%
27. BSQ 6 x 1 @ 96%

WEEK 10
28. BSQ 5 x 5 @ 88%
29. FSQ 6 x 2-3 @ 60%
30. BSQ 6 x 1 @ 95%


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe
This looks like a version of one of our programs, but both Mike Burgener and Greg Everett are quite capable of designing squat programs that work. I by no means have a monopoly on that, and I suggest that if you got the actual program from Mike's Gym's website they would know the subtleties of their percentages better than me.

Man, this is 2 questions in a row that I have bailed on. Maybe the next one will suit me better...

_Wolf_'s Sig:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
_Wolf_ is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook
Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2007, 01:01 PM   #2
_Wolf_
Rank: Light Heavyweight
Experience: 5-7 Years
 
_Wolf_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Trinity University, San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 4,790
Country:

Gender:
Send a message via MSN to _Wolf_
Default

a few more:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reform
Strength and BP splits, ? For Rip

For Rip:

1) My understanding of intermediate programming, from your book Practical Programming, is that a trainee must organize multiple workouts within a week to disrupt homeostasis and spur progress. The Texas Method example uses Volume, Active Recovery, and Intensity days to achieve this end. This makes sense, and I enjoyed great progress on the TM, but my question is: What then of people gaining strength on Body Part Splits?

Inherently, they are (or should be) on the intermediate or higher level in their training stages, yet they are able to gain strength with only a 1x per week frequency. What enables them to do this? Or, does the supercompensation and hypertrophy they develop enable the gains? Would the strength gains necessarily be slower?

Thanks alot!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe
Novices can gain strength on bodypart splits, just like they can gain strength on an actual full-body strength training protocol. The actual question should be: why would a person who is sufficiently unadapted that they are capable of making linear progress like a novice want to use a programming model that limits their ability to make rapid progress? And the answer to that question is that they wouldn't if they understood that bodypart splits waste training time for novices. If you can squat 3 x week, you can make faster progress than on a split that only has your squat 2 x week. And bodypart thinking is not performance thinking, so I may be a little rusty on it.

Rip
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reform
I think maybe I wasn't clear on the original post.

From conversations with advocates of Body Part splits, they will tell you that a novice should not be on one. They will tell you BP splits should be reserved for "more advanced" trainees. The point of confusion for me is this:

From a programming perspective, I can't figure out an advanced lifter could gain strength on a BP split, since its frequency is dropped to 1x per week. Is there a more complex programming element involved here?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle / Fortified Iron
I'm not Ripp, but I'll give this a shot for him.

You should define 'advanced lifter'.

There is need for specialization in intermediate-advanced type training. From a bodybuilding stand-point, that is where a body part split might come into play. However a trainee does not have to limit their training to strictly body part splits, a typeical full body or upper/lower training approach would be suitable aswell. Those that advocate a body part split for a more trained bodybuilder are probably still training at a frequency of 2x's per week, per muscle.

Kyle
_Wolf_ is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook
Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2007, 01:03 PM   #3
_Wolf_
Rank: Light Heavyweight
Experience: 5-7 Years
 
_Wolf_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Trinity University, San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 4,790
Country:

Gender:
Send a message via MSN to _Wolf_
Default

another thread..

Quote:
Originally Posted by aussiethrower
Throwing, Injury and Starting Strength

hi mark
firstly congrats on Starting Strength - its a great book. i am using it alot as i am coaching a few athletes in track and field. They are either just starting weight training or have been instructed with poor form. Your book has been a God send.

I also used your training protocol in Starting Strength for 12 weeks to rehab myself back to 70% of pre surgery strength ( I had knee surgery to realign my knee cap in Feb, i returned weight training at start of April). I have since moved on to my specific throwing training i followed before knee surgery. However I am still using your protocols for some exercises.

A few questions
1. I have a trainer who simply cant get into a squat position while holding the barbell correctly. It seems his shoulders and hips are very inflexible. Can you suggest any exercises that will help him get more flexible in these areas?

2. Can I use the clean or snatch high pull instead of the power clean for this individual?

3. Is it ok to add some single legged exercises to the Starting Strength program? or should i remove a squat session a week and add the single legged splits squats, lunges or bulgarian squats?

4. Would rotating Deadlifts, Snatch Grip Deadlifts and Trapbar deadlifts every 6 to 8 weeks still work with the Starting Strength Protocols?

5. My guys are coming up to an important competition at the end of October - would it be wise to deload a few weeks out, that said how to i do deload using the Starting Strength Protocols?

cheers
Wayne
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe
Thanks for the kind words about the book. Glad it has helped.

1. The squat itself is the best stretch for the squat. Jam him into the correct position and make him do the squat as correctly as possible to the extent that he is capable, enforcing position like you would if you were having him do a stretch, and making as few accommodations to his lack of flexibility as you can while still getting a squat out of him. He will improve quickly.

2. You can, but it is a lower quality exercise. No one approaches a hi-pull the same way they approach a clean or snatch, not even an advanced lifter, because you know you're not actually going under the bar and the commitment to completing the pull is not there. The answer to this problem is to get better at teaching the clean, and there is no better way to do that than with a kid that doesn't move well. Hard cases are the best teachers of teachers, so jump right in there.

3. Single-legged stuff is not part of our program. These are relatively advanced movements that, as far as I am concerned, apply to few athletes. Asymmetric work is best done in the context of sport practice, not strength work, and the attempt to make strength work so specific that it applies very precisely to sport reflects a misunderstanding of why we train for strength and how it applies to overall sports preparation.

4. Trap bar deadlifts are silly, IMO. Just deadlift and see if the guy will give you your money back for the trap bar.

5. Novice lifters don't really need to taper for a contest, and intermediate- level trainees just reduce volume and up intensity a couple of weeks out. This is all beaten to death in PPST. See the handy link on this post.

Rip
_Wolf_ is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook
Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2007, 01:09 PM   #4
_Wolf_
Rank: Light Heavyweight
Experience: 5-7 Years
 
_Wolf_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Trinity University, San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 4,790
Country:

Gender:
Send a message via MSN to _Wolf_
Default

regarding The Texas Method

Quote:
Originally Posted by Markus
Texas Method for Weightlifting

Could one utilize the Texas Method for gaining back strength for the olympic lifts?
Something like

Power Snatch
power clean
Clean Pull
OH Squats

3x a week? going 5x5 (ramped), 2x5 @ 80%, and for a 1,2,3,4RM?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe
Oh, I don't see why not. I've never used that specific one, but there is no reason why it wouldn't work. Lots of these types are things are best experimented with for yourself, and permission is not necessary for that.
-----x------

A2G Squatting

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave76
Mark,
Ass to grass squatting seems to be all the rage these days. There are many people who believe that you teach ATG squatting. Could you comment, please?

David...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe
Dave:

Thanks for bringing this up. Squat depth is critically important, but so is correct form. ATG-level depth most usually requires that the lumbar muscles relax the lordosis and that the hamstrings relax before extreme depth can be reached. It doesn't sound like a good idea to me that anything be relaxed in a deep squat, since doing this kills your good controlled rebound out of the bottom and risks your intervertebral discs. Those rare individuals that can obtain ass-to-ankles depth without relaxing anything might be able to get away with it, but as a general rule you should squat as deep as you can with a hard-arched lower back and tight hamstings and adductors. This depth will be below parallel, but it will not usually be "ATG".

Rip
------x-------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Serpens Aeon
Conventional vs. Sumo Deadlifts for the Injured

Hi Mark,

I have a question regarding my deadlift form.

This past February I herniated a disc (L4 or L5, I believe) and as a result I've been out of commission since April due to pain, and what not. My orthopedic specialist has had me confined to trunk exercises for the last month or so, while I've been getting tri-weekly traction treatments from the chiropractor. Thus far, progress has been good, although my ability to pull still feels somewhat dodgy. Nonetheless, I'm itching to train again soon. So, onto my question...

I've always been a conventional-form deadlifter, as sumo-style deadlifts felt somewhat awkward, but now that I really need to watch out for my spine, would they be the better option to allow me to keep pulling? I realize you're not a medical practitioner, but I figure you've ideally got some experience with such a predicament.

Any input would be greatly appreciated.

Regards,
Greg
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe
In all honesty, I have had so little experience with sumo deadlifts that I am really not the guy to ask about this. In theory, sumo lines up the spine more vertically, so that there is less shear, but if the erectors are strong enough to hold the spine rigid there is no shear with a conventional deadlift, or even a goodmorning. I'd say that the Elite guys are the ones to ask about this, not me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serpens Aeon
Understood. Nonetheless, thank you very much for taking the time to answer my question.

I'm not sure, however, who you are referring to in regard to the "Elite guys."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Misanthrope (Matt)
I'm not an expert by any stretch of the imagination, but I was of the mind that the body style of lifter was an important factor in determining whether conventional or sumo deadlifting would be preferable. My understanding was that a lifter with shorter arms and legs in relation to the torso might be more comfortable with sumo style. I have fairly long legs and arms, but I'm about average height for a male. My back is almost horizontal when lining up for a sumo pull, and I'm not able to get any power from legs. It doesn't "feel" right at all; thus, I don't do it. However, using the conventional style I can line up perfectly, albeit with a fairly narrow stance. It feels much more natural for me to pull conventionally.

It seems to me that if sumo pulling felt "awkward" to you before, it wouldn't be any better of an idea do it after a back injury. But what do I know?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe
Matt:

There is an extensive treatment of anthropometry in the new book. It is probably the most commonly misunderstood aspect of coaching correct technique, and we hope to help clarify the situation.

Rip
-------x-------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle / Fortified Iron
Upcoming Book

I know we spoke about this on the phone but I'd like to let everybody here see some stuff on it.

When will it be released and what will be the basic outline of the new book? I believe you mention its Starting Strength Second Edition, with added information. How much new stuff? Where can we order from?

Kyle
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe
The new book is Starting Strength 2nd Edition: Basic Barbell Training. It contains all the original material from SS and about 50% more, in the form of new analysis of the five lifts and a big chapter on the legit barbell assistance exercises. We are preparing the final draft now and it should go to the printer before 8/10 and be back by mid-September.

When the pdf leaves here for the printer, we will post a pre-sell special on our website. Watch for it starting next week.

Thanks for your interest.

Rip
-----x-----

ill post more as newer threads get started
_Wolf_ is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook
Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2007, 01:20 PM   #5
EricT
Rank: Heavyweight
Experience: 7-10 Years
 
EricT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,314
Country:

Gender:
Default

I really really question the mentality that all single leg variations are "more advanced". They have a big balance component, true, but I don't see them as being more advance then a squat. And the whole sport specific thing makes no sense to me also. Many of the single leg variations are simply more functinal than a squat for everyday living, sports aside.

There are many, many valid reasons to include them for all sorts of people.

I don't know why anyone would close their mind to so much. Rip seems to be very rigid on exercise selection. That is the one thing I don't like. But he's a great man, that's for sure.

There is already tons of great information in this thread. But I really hope no one looks at it as a "bible". Never box yourself in and limit your horizons.

EricT's Sig:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
or
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


If you act sanctimonious I will just list out your logical fallacies until you get pissed off and spew blasphemous remarks.
EricT is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook
Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2007, 01:23 PM   #6
_Wolf_
Rank: Light Heavyweight
Experience: 5-7 Years
 
_Wolf_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Trinity University, San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 4,790
Country:

Gender:
Send a message via MSN to _Wolf_
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric3237 View Post
I really really question the mentality that all single leg variations are "more advanced". They have a big balance component, true, but I don't see them as being more advance then a squat.
very true. they are probably just as complex....or maybe more....

Quote:
Many of the single leg variations are simply more functinal than a squat for everyday living, sports aside.
yup. thats true.

Quote:
I don't know why anyone would close their mind to so much. Rip seems to be very rigid on exercise selection. That is the one thing I don't like. But he's a great man, that's for sure.
yes, Rip is VERY rigid on exercise selection....but he said in his new book he has some info on assistance work. lets see what it is.
_Wolf_ is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook
Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2007, 06:21 PM   #7
hunt0r
Rank: Member
Experience: 1-2 Years
 
hunt0r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 305
Country:

Gender:
Send a message via AIM to hunt0r
Default

Good thread, thanks for posting this stuff Sentinel.
hunt0r is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook
Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2007, 08:24 PM   #8
triqqey
Rank: Member
Experience: > 1 Year
 
triqqey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Podunk, USA
Posts: 203
Country:

Gender:
Default

x2
triqqey is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2007, 04:24 AM   #9
Darkhorse
Rank: Light Heavyweight
Experience: 7-10 Years
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 4,174
Country:

Gender:
Send a message via Yahoo to Darkhorse
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric
I don't know why anyone would close their mind to so much. Rip seems to be very rigid on exercise selection.
Yeah, always comes across as a meat and potatoes kind of guy.. Kinda like re-reading my Dinosaur Training ebook.
Darkhorse is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook
Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2007, 10:51 PM   #10
_Wolf_
Rank: Light Heavyweight
Experience: 5-7 Years
 
_Wolf_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Trinity University, San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 4,790
Country:

Gender:
Send a message via MSN to _Wolf_
Default Strength and BP splits, ? For Rip

from strengthmill.net..

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reform View Post
For Rip:

1) My understanding of intermediate programming, from your book Practical Programming, is that a trainee must organize multiple workouts within a week to disrupt homeostasis and spur progress. The Texas Method example uses Volume, Active Recovery, and Intensity days to achieve this end. This makes sense, and I enjoyed great progress on the TM, but my question is: What then of people gaining strength on Body Part Splits?

Inherently, they are (or should be) on the intermediate or higher level in their training stages, yet they are able to gain strength with only a 1x per week frequency. What enables them to do this? Or, does the supercompensation and hypertrophy they develop enable the gains? Would the strength gains necessarily be slower?

Thanks alot!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
Novices can gain strength on bodypart splits, just like they can gain strength on an actual full-body strength training protocol. The actual question should be: why would a person who is sufficiently unadapted that they are capable of making linear progress like a novice want to use a programming model that limits their ability to make rapid progress? And the answer to that question is that they wouldn't if they understood that bodypart splits waste training time for novices. If you can squat 3 x week, you can make faster progress than on a split that only has your squat 2 x week. And bodypart thinking is not performance thinking, so I may be a little rusty on it.

Rip
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reform View Post
I think maybe I wasn't clear on the original post.

From conversations with advocates of Body Part splits, they will tell you that a novice should not be on one. They will tell you BP splits should be reserved for "more advanced" trainees. The point of confusion for me is this:

From a programming perspective, I can't figure out an advanced lifter could gain strength on a BP split, since its frequency is dropped to 1x per week. Is there a more complex programming element involved here?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle View Post
I'm not Ripp, but I'll give this a shot for him.

You should define 'advanced lifter'.

There is need for specialization in intermediate-advanced type training. From a bodybuilding stand-point, that is where a body part split might come into play. However a trainee does not have to limit their training to strictly body part splits, a typeical full body or upper/lower training approach would be suitable aswell. Those that advocate a body part split for a more trained bodybuilder are probably still training at a frequency of 2x's per week, per muscle.

Kyle
Quote:
Originally Posted by britlifter View Post
Its my understanding that an advanced BBer may only train each bodypart 1x per week becus he can generate alot of intensity & is using heavier weights with a better mind to muscle connection and therfore is able to damage his muscle more & may need to give himself more time to recover?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle View Post
Rip covers some of this in his book Practical Programming.

However to sum it up pretty much the more advanced a trainee is the more time they need between training sessions is due to the high rates of neural and physiological stress from the training sessions. Closer programming and organziation is needed to take place during this period if the trainee or athlete wants to increase in performance.

Kyle
Sentinel
_Wolf_ is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook
Reply With Quote
Reply

  Bodybuilding Forum - Bodybuilding.net > Bodybuilding Forum > Training


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.