Well you responded to Kane talking about assumptions. The only assumption you are making is that SS is the best way to go for everyone. What are these other assumptions you are talking about?
Quote:
|
With the internet, it's the best place to start without knowing the person's background, what injury or postoral problems they have, and/or being able to see them in action. Sentinel's modifcations assumed he needed to do a Glute-Ham raise for some reason.
|
I can pretty much guarantee that there are some basic assumptions that CAN be made that CAN lead to some pretty safe bets. You keep mentioning GHR's as if it is some sin to throw in some GHR's
. Anybody who wants to do some GHR's provided they treat with common sense, be my guest! But as far as assumptions I can guess that a bigger percntage of people will be served by doing some glute/ham/stabibility/lumbar endurance right off the bat. It'a a damn good assumption and, well, GHR's actually do fit the bill quite well and won't screw up anyone's program if they start little and build up. Not the only choice of course. If I say, there are better ways to start and you say stay with standard SS then there is no difference. We both simply think there is a better way to start.
A program is how you program thing. A group of exercises and sets and reps is a WORKOUT not a program. Does 4x6 instead of 5x5 fundamentally change things, for instance, in terms of a programming environment?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jeffo
Scrapping the whole thing and chucking in a bunch of new exercises and/or assistance stuff, using a new rep scheme and moving to some kind or double or triple progression right off the bat isn't always necessary. If it's necessary later on, fine. I don't see why it's a good idea to modify things before bare bones has proven ineffective.
|
I think you are still reffering to Sentinel's post. I thought this discussion has moved on beyond that. I already said I didn't think his rigid modificatios were necessary. As far the ways of progressing it's as if I have challenged a fundamental tenant of faith. Most people given the chocie will naturally go in and load the bar workout to workout. As well they should. All I said was give some flexibility and choice as to progression for when that fails rather than the constant "beat myself to death, backoff, beat myself to death, back off" deal. I certainly never mentioned chucking in a whole bunch of new exercises. A few chucked in and perhaps a replacement here or there.
You said this:
Quote:
|
There's no need for this. There are millions of ways to get around this by simply cyclying or varying the load and taking the progression a bit slower.
|
Again, cycling or varying the load would suggest that you are dealing with one exercise. You mentioned squat and said that so that is all I was reffering too. But you have a problem with chaging rep schemes. Changing rep schemes would be a way to vary the stress while continuing progression. That would be changing the loads as well.
All I am doing is defending my right and anyone's right on this board to recommend what they want. Rippetoes didn't write a bible. He is not the only strength trainer in the world and he's not even the most successful. Is he great? Hell, yes!
The part of me making it sould like you are an idiot....if none of it's true then say so. Trainers get paid these days to hand out the same programs to all their clients or to just do random fancy things to look cool. So, bro, if you are saying that people pay you to train them on Rippetoes, then I can only say that a trainers job is to develop programs for their clients based on each ones individual needs and goals. So get offended but I am sick of the state of "personal training". I don't know if any of the things I mentioned are true! I am simply reacting to the idea that you start everyone you train on the same program. My apologies for any offense I have caused. I am willing to back up what I recommend to people and certainly back up every choice I make for those I train. In many exhaustive words
I understand what you are saying with just recommending standard SS and not YOUR variation. But I for one have complete confidence in my recommendations and have no real problems with recommending them
. I am talking about my recommendatins not other peoples.
Yes, this is another long post but that is because I'm trying to get a lot of ideas across.
The thing about inefficiencies though, the part I want to get across is about all these people who are doing fine with this SS or any other format. The people who aren't getting injuried (seemingly) and just get stronger and stronger...what have you. It goes back to the comment that Jonson made about form being more important than progression. And to bring Kane into this because I want to respond to him as well....
Kane commented once that "how you lift it is more important that how much you lift". Or something to that effect. I don't know if people really understand just how pervasive this question of form and inefficiencies are. See, most of those people who seem to be doing quite well with SS or similar aggresive loading stategies, if you were to look at what quite well LOOKED LIKE you would immediately re-think how well they were doing.
People can have an amazing ability to keep getting "stronger" on a lift with the worst technique imaginable. And I think we can all imagine what I am talking about. You have the guy that deadlifts with his lower back. You have the guy who caves over on squats and basically does good morinings all the while getting higher and higher. I could go on and on. Basically their technique breaks down more and more as they load but based on what you see on an internet journal...they are doing well. They are "progressing".
For every guy whose bad technique and inefficiencies shut him down early and force him to make some changes you have a guy who will go on and on for a couple years until a certain threshold is reached. But here is the thing most people really don't know at the beginning: You can never go back. Once that stuff has caught up to you and you have to scrap certain things, change the way you train, add a bunch of supportive stuff and all of it EARLIER than should have been....you can never really go back and do without it. You have forced more complicated programming on yourself than would have been necessary and you'll never quite reach the potential you would have. Maybe if you have a really good corrective exercise guy but even then basically what has happened in a way is that you have to train like an advanced guy who doesn't have advanced strength. I believe this kind of thing will happen to people who do well with SS and moave right into a 5x5 and keep barelling along.
P.S. Just to clarify, I wasn't talking about triple progression. Never said that. I was talking about single progression in my examples. But some double progression could be used for a challenge on days when you feel froggy (the beginner) but triple progression would be a little much and would have to be done as part of a systematic approach (a build up and back off). But single should do it most of the time.