III. Programming
**A. The basics, Part 2
**B. Stalling and Resetting
**C. What to do after Rippetoe
**D. General Questions
*****1. How much weight should I use?
*****2. What about sets and reps?
The basics, Part 2
Question - What are the basic considerations in programming
1) Exercise
Back squats, front squats, lunges, and leg extensions all train the quadriceps. If you have done these 4 exercises, you know darn well they have a VERY significant impact on the body overall. An exercise's affect is both "local" and "systemic".
Leg extensions have a very high level of "local" affect. The burn is brutal, and for a few minutes afterward, you may have trouble walking. If all you did for your legs was some hard leg extensions, then today you'd feel it, but tomorrow you'd probably be fine. Your leg extension workout will have zero affect on the rest of your body.
On the opposite end, back squats may not produce the specific localized burn that leg extensions do, but you may end up walking like a duck for upwards of 3-4 days afterward. When you're done with a squat workout, your legs and hips are tired, but your entire body is a bit tired as well.
2)Volume and Workload
Volume = sets * reps
Workload = sets * reps * weight used
3 sets, 5 reps, 200 lbs
3*5*200=3000 lbs of workload.
Generally, exercises performed with lighter weight can be done for a high # of repetitions, which may make things seem like higher reps = higher workload, but, you can't JUST take workload into consideration without also including:
3) Intensity
This is defined as % 1-RM. It is not "perceived exertion", nor is it "difficulty". This is the officially used and quantifiable definition for intensity.
So our above example, 3x5x200=3000
This may very well work someone who can only bench about 230 lbs (200 lbs / 230 lb max = 87% intensity). However, if you can bench 300 lbs, then a 200 lb bench is only 66% of your 1-RM, so it doesn't do much.
It is helpful to adjust our basic workload equation with the intensity factor to get "adjusted workload"
For example:
230-lb bench press: 200lbs. = 87% 1-RM:
Adjusted workload = 3*5*200*87% =~ 2610
300-lb bench press: 200lbs. = 66% 1-RM
Adjusted workload = 3*5*200*66% ~ 2000
Notice the "Adjusted workload" for the stronger athlete is ~ 25% less despite using the exact same weight. This VERY important when determining heavy/light/medium days, as well as recovery days in a "volume-recovery-intensity" type scheme (both discussed later)
In order to keep warmup sets out of the equation, anything < 60-70% 1-RM is not used for purposes of workload calculation, unless several sets and/or reps are performed of said exercise.
4) Scheduling
For the general trainee, this is pretty flexible. For the specific athlete (i.e. a PL or football player), scheduling is one of the most important considerations and can possibly become the overriding determinant.
Joe Average lifts weights because he wants to. Joe Halfback lifts weights so he is better on game day. Joe Powerlifter lifts weights to be stronger for a competition. As such, the schedule and planning of training must suit the exact goals of the trainee.
5) Variation Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mark Rippetoe, pg. 168-171, PP
The intermediate stage is the place where most athletes make their biggest training mistakes...Many intermediate trainees get caught up in an endless cycle of “changing routines”, constantly messing with the weekly schedule of exercises, sets, and reps...variety lies in the way the basic exercises are applied, and not in a bunch of new exercises.
Translation - Just because you're not doing the core program, doesn't mean you shouldn't use core exercises. Do not change your primary workout stimulii from "squats-benches-rows" to "leg extensions - Nautilus flyes - Soup can curls". That isn't variety. That's stupid. Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mark Rippetoe, pg. 173 PP
Variety for variety’s sake is pointless. All training must be planned, and success must be planned for, and all the variety in the world is no substitute for correct planning.
Translation - "Different" isn't always better. "Better planning" will equal "better", however.