Quote:
|
How could you have undertrained then but not now when you're doing 1 rep per exercise.
|
Because in 2008 I had to test the LOAD. I wanted to see if ONE REP at 80% of the 1RM was OPTIMAL or not. F=MA so even if the load is lighter Acceleration might have compensated the load. It tooks me months to realize it was not the case because at the begining I made REgains at 80% and I thought I was making progress... until the "progress" stop. It's only then after months wasted than I realized that 80% and even 85% and 90% were not enough to provide a stimulus, only enough for REgains. At 95% I have been able to make progress, NEW PR. In 2009 I also tested 100% and I overtrained (lost strength again). Then I tested 100% with a VERY low frequency (a la Heavy Duty) and it failed too, I made minimum progress.
Quote:
|
You could make major progress. If you knew what a proper progression was. You have automatically thrown out double and triple progression by limiting everything to one set and one rep. The only people that follow a single progression are absolute beginners and even then it is a short period until other means are required.
|
I don't understand why you think that a double progression is needed, why not simply add weight as you get stronger ?
Quote:
|
Something else worth mentioning is that your 'progression' may be nothing more than flucatuations in ability. Let's see where your progress is in 6 months.
|
At least One Rep at 95% can maintain strength and in my opinion and experience it is enough to make NEW GAINS. You are right I need to see if Great Gains are possible. So you are free to follow my LOG or not, to follow my adventure.
Threaded Mode