| _Wolf_ |
Rank: Light Heavyweight
Experience: 5-7 Years
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Trinity University, San Antonio, Texas
| | 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
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.
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.
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:
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:
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?
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
Originally Posted by chicanerous
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.
Rippetoe Squat |
1. BSQ 5 x 5 @ 70%
2. FSQ 6 x 2-3 @ 65%
3. BSQ 6 x 1 @ 90%
4. BSQ 5 x 5 @ 73%
5. FSQ 6 x 2-3 @ 65%
6. BSQ 6 x 1 @ 91%
7. BSQ 5 x 5 @ 75%
8. FSQ 6 x 2-3 @ 67%
9. BSQ 6 x 1 @ 92%
10. BSQ 5 x 5 @ 77%
11. FSQ 6 x 2-3 @ 67%
12. BSQ 6 x 1 @ 93%
13. BSQ 5 x 5 @ 79%
14. FSQ 6 x 2-3 @ 67%
15. BSQ 6 x 1 @ 93%
16. BSQ 5 x 5 @ 81%
17. FSQ 6 x 2-3 @ 67%
18. BSQ 6 x 1 @ 93%
19. BSQ 5 x 5 @ 83%
20. FSQ 6 x 2-3 @ 66%
21. BSQ 6 x 1 @ 94%
22. BSQ 5 x 5 @ 85%
23. FSQ 6 x 2-3 @ 64%
24. BSQ 6 x 1 @ 94%
25. BSQ 5 x 5 @ 87%
26. FSQ 6 x 2-3 @ 62%
27. BSQ 6 x 1 @ 96%
28. BSQ 5 x 5 @ 88%
29. FSQ 6 x 2-3 @ 60%
30. BSQ 6 x 1 @ 95%
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...