ok, i have the time to respond to this....most of what im gonna say has been said a LOT better by Eric and i dont want to paraphrase what he's said because its just regurgitating the same information....but ill put a few things across which
I feel strongly for
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffo
Why not? Just beause some people have had trouble with it? Just because some people needed to add certain assistance stuff to correct problems? Just because some people loaded to aggressively and their form broke down and they developed hip flexor or knee pain? To catagorically say "do NOT do Starting Strength" just becuase some people have reported problems with it reminds me of your sig.
Starting Strength as written is fine for any true NOVICE, no exercise modifications or assistance work necessary until/unless they are necessary. The only thing that needs to be modified is the loading, which can be too agressive for someone without a more experienced person watching them. Here's where the internet breaks down :(
I guess we'll just have to disagree on this one bro!
Jeff
|
Jeff,
1.) My MAIN reson for not liking the SS protocol isnt the exact same as Eric's (i dont get pm's asking for help - which is a good thing because i doubt id be able to help anyone compared to Eric). i dont like ss because everyone makes it the be all and end all of training. not just on this forum. you go to bb.com and ask a newbie question what happens? EVERYONE insists on you doing starting strength. you go to intensemuscle.com and ask this questions - same thing happens. enough already.
2.) starting strength is a template. it must and should be manipulated. why is that no one advises regular joe's to do sergio olivia's program? because it MUST be modified. why is arnold's program good but it needs to be tweaked? because not everyone is the same.
3.) similarly, the only thing about starting strength which i like is:
(a) it makes you focus on the squat which i think is very important. many people say the power clean is important too but ive never done that so i cannot speak for experience.
(b) it relies on steady progression in terms of weights.
(c) it will probably help with motor unit recruitment because it focuses on a select few good compound exercises.
4.) now, here is what i do not like about the program
(a) it does not allow exercise flexibility. you cannot do just 5 exercises and expect to progress all the time. even if you say that "use the program till you stall and then shift over to another program", what about the muscle imbalances which have already taken place because of running this program for that time period? not only will there be severe muscle imbalances there will also be form issues because if you practise bad form (because of muscle imbalances of course) you end up using that forever and then you need to go all the way back to the drawing board to learn it again. i know this because i did the texas method and i ignored my deadlift for over 6 months and i brought my A2G squat upto 295x4 @ 185 BW whereas my deadlift was not even 225x1 at the same time.
(b) why rely ONLY on 3x5 as a set-rep scheme? if you're a beginner you can progress on virtually anything. its important to switch things up sometimes. having something rigid and set in stone isnt right. why not have the trainee do 3x5 squats for 2-3 weeks and then make one day into a 3x10 @ 50% of 3x5 for 1 workout a week and then switch it to something different later on? it doesnt need to be just one or the other.
(c) weak points. this may tie in with (a) but unlike muscle imbalances, weak points are where an exercise specially targetted to that point must be used. for example, with rippetoe's theory, if my sticking point on the bench press is midpoint, i should preferably just reset the weight a bit to allow for some strength gains on my triceps and then i should go at it again. however, wouldnt it have been easier on me if i had been doing other exercises focussing more on triceps before? wouldnt i have been able to avoid this problem?
(d) unilateral exercises. i have had IMMENSE success with these and from the stuff i read by eric cressey, alwyn cosgrove, dan john, etc i see that a LOT of people benefitting from unilateral stuff...this doesnt need to be set in stone but used regularly on a flexible level. for example, you can do unilateral RDLs after your deadlifts every 2 weeks for 2-4 sets depending on how you feel...or, you can replace military press with unilateral dumbbell shoulder presses for a couple of weeks.
5.) i would've added an (e) above but perhaps this is better...you mentioned this as a problem already: too rigid a loading regiment. thats a problem in my books too.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jeffo
PS: Which assistance exercises have you had to use with people? I've had to use pull throughs and hip extensions to help with PS activation, as well as face pulls and scapulae retraction stuff to help the shoulders out. So far nothing else has been necessary, but I'm sure you've had more experience with this than me.
|
unilateral stuff
tons of shoulder prehab stuff
glute ham raises
something tricep-specific
something that works the bottom end of the bench and press
pull-ups for back work
there are lots of things that can be added in from time to time....
Sentinel