Yeah I have, unfortunately most of his articles are cookie cutter type ones and don't really get into the ultra world. Some good points though that we have discussed
Exercise selection to vary stressors, this is more of the interference issues and modalities of running we have discussed.
Recovery and refueling
Progressive overload and accumulation
I'd be curious to see what kind of programs he would give to an ultra runner. Hi articles are also very focused on competing and racing, which for me don't really matter that much. Waking up on Monday after an event and being able to lift or run is my typical goal.
That second article was an interesting read, twice a week sessions at ridiculously high reps. I would imagine those guys had some crazy size growth to be gaining 80lbs on there squats.
I'd be curious if the easy strength workout would have similar results, it should as you are squatting/deadlifting 5 times a week for ten reps a session and the weight is very likely around 80%. So total volume is about the same.
Yah, like you, given that my running goals are simple and modest, even simpler and more modest than yours in fact, I always like to dumb-down the takeaways when I read that sort of article. What I understood is that if I adopt a simple EOD protocol, alternating lifting and running, and only train an hour per day, I probably got the interference issue more or less covered. For you, it's more complicated, but since you're not high-performance, the solution can still be relatively simple, and it seems like you found a good one with your upper/lower split and four-week cycle, limited running, and cycling substitute.
What I've liked most about Nuckols and Viada's conclusions is that they support Wendler's similar idea that a good aerobic base, beside conferring the obvious health benefits, will,
pace current Meathead orthodoxy, increase your work capacity to lift. I mean, I've enjoyed getting up to speed on the meathead sites, and I've learned that strength training has a lot more going on in it than I thought, but it still seems to me that it's dominated by a bunch of young, stupid, vain idiots who like to call each other names. And now there's this whole anti-cardio campaign going on.
It just seems so obvious to me that running or any other aerobic activity is good for you. It was good to be reminded that cycling is lower impact than running, so it might make a better aerobic companion to st, to minimize tissue damage and catabolism, but this too is pretty obvious if we think about it for more than a minute. The meathead prejudice against cardio is just another example of group-think run amok. Shows you how easy it is for fascism to arise.
Anyway, I like the more objective, calm perspective of Nuckols, Tuchscherer, and others. You know, the grown-ups.
But with Nuckols's review of that study on volume, I guess whenever people make incredible gains like that, especially in this case when they have all been training for years and squat above BW, I always wonder what the hell their training was like before the study.
"These were experienced lifters with an average of five to eight years under the bar and an average squat of ~155kg. Every group had non-negligible strength average strength gains. Every person in the 4-set group made strength gains, and the average strength gains over 10 weeks in the 8-set group were around 37kg (82lbs)."
After five to eight years of training you only got your squat up to 340 lbs? But then in just weeks you increase it by 82 pounds -- something like a 25% increase? Even on steriods that seems far-fetched. I mean, I put something like 80 pounds on my deadlift and squat last year, from 275 to 355 and and maybe 175 to 275, respectively, but it was only because I was relatively untrained in those lifts. The next 80 pounds will take at least a year, probably much longer.
Nuckols doesn't voice any skepticism at all about these miraculous claims. It's like Thibaudeau over at T-Nation rolling out yet another "program" that's going to add 10 pounds of lean muscle, or 30 pounds to your bench, or some-such, in just 12 weeks.
Anyway, I've about had it with this stuff. I'm getting to feel like I know about as much as I need to know . . . Sets, Reps, Frequency, Volume, Intensity . . . I reread some stuff this morning, because I woke up with the Jones to get rid of my higher rep workout today and just do high intensity, but I became reconvinced that higher reps help build the mass that supports max efforts, and also help build work capacity, so the 5-8-3 wave stands.
Then I reread RTS about fatigue management, and dropping 5% to maintain the RPE, but really, this is just a more precise way of doing drop sets. So today I think I've decided to do eight reps at 75%, and then try to maintain that rep-count for straight sets across. If I can't maintain it, or perceive that I can't before I even try the next set, I'll drop five pounds. Simple.
I like Nuckols general point about volume, but Iggy also makes a point about not adding volume too quickly:
"Wait a minute. If you get a bigger training effect, why not just do more volume anyway? One answer is that there are practical limitations to how long and how often we can train as athletes. If your body becomes adapted to 405x5x10, guess what you have to do to produce further adaptations? Even more volume! At some point, you’re going to run out of resources in terms of time, energy, and willingness. Most of us are not professional athletes with the ability to spend 6-8 hours training every single day.
The second answer is that you’re actually short-circuiting your long term potential by hopping on a high volume program too early. Why? Well, if you work up to 5×10 slowly, you will have gone through more stress-recovery-adaptation cycles to get to that level of volume tolerance than the guy who jumped to 5×10 right off the bat.
To make it plain, you’re going to be stronger than your competitors at the same level of volume because you’ll be more adapted than they are. Your competitor who did 405x5x10 may initially pass you with his 7.5lbs jump to your 5lbs jump, but by the time you work up to 5×10, you’ll have experienced many 5lbs jumps rather than just one 7.5lbs jump. You’ll improve the entire time without pushing your volume tolerance needlessly high."
I take this to mean that you need to add load as well as volume, not one or the other. I think I've done this by adding just one set (plus one more for my two weakest lifts) to the 2x5 protocol of last year. If I follow Izzy's logic correctly, I should continue increasing loads at this volume level, then when I start to plateau, add more volume or frequency. Or just call it a day and be satisfied and maintain my gains.
BTW, have you ever tried a lever belt?
There really isn't much out there in internet land related to both long distance running and heavy lifting. Too bad most of the others doing it are also involved in the cult.
Because most people can't manage it. You're pretty unique.