Came across this searching for some key words...
http://www.allthingsgym.com/huge-list-of-training-programs/
http://www.allthingsgym.com/huge-list-of-training-programs/
Concurrent Strength Training & Running 2015: Eight-Week Workout Cycle II
- Thread starter Bare Lee
- Start date
Yah, that passage stood out for me as well. I wonder what he considers 'moderate intensity'?
Could you elaborate your question a bit? I don't understand.
Wow, great find. Although when you see so many programs laid out like that, you realize how arbitrary the manipulation of parameters is. Up through intermediate level, all programs work, right? It's just a matter of finding one that fits one's personality, time, and energy. Still, I'm a little bummed that my 583 Six Lifts Fractional Loading program wasn't listed. The fitness world better get with it, and send me $19.95 + shipping for my DVD series.
Sorry you are basically doing the undulating method with all 6 lifts. It's maybe a strict interpretation of the program. I'm just curious as to why you aren't alternating the three rep ranges with exercises each day. Basically what I am doing below.
Anyway I think I am going back to something like yours next cycle. While adding a little variety to see if that helps with overtraining a bit. It may be ambitious though.
Anyway I think I am going back to something like yours next cycle. While adding a little variety to see if that helps with overtraining a bit. It may be ambitious though.
Most of the links are dead but you can google the names to find them.
There are so many different thoughts, for example on that article I just posted he believes in PaP, but If you read Staley's stuff he states multiple times one heavy work set is all you really need. These are some of the huge variances I see between some of the strength gurus. I really like both of these authors too and both are very strong so obviously more than one method can work. Yeah everything works until you want to lose weight or run ultras!
Moderate intensity would likely be a tempo run, he likes hard and easy runs nothing above aerobic and below lactate threshold. So basically sprint, hard intervals or run slow I think.
In regards to the hybrid athlete, he states that most lifting and running programs need to be stripped down to be successfully combined. I am wondering though if maybe I could get the same benefit doing only 3 lifts a day and maybe trying to lift 4 times a week? Or do the 6 twice a week? However on the other hand how do you fit in the various rep ranges he likes adequately?
Yah, that was kind of the idea last summer/fall when I was doing 3x1/3x3/2x5.
Yah, I was being cheeky. There's nothing new under the sun. I'm doing a Full Body DUP with Fractional Loading, to be exact. But if I call it the "583" program, I can pretend I've come up with something entirely new and impress Christian Thibaudeau.
On a somewhat more serious note, I do think the fractional loading component is an interesting twist to DUP, and turns it into sort of an Easy Strength approach. It's way too early to tell, but I'm really liking how comfortable everything is, and how each week just adds a pound or two to each lift. It's very seamless. The potential drawback is boredom, because it feels like you're doing the same damn workout each time. But I have a pretty high tolerance for repetition, and I feel like I'm getting pretty good results. Yesterday when I was loading the deadlift for 229 I thought to myself, "this is ridiculous, just make it 230 and screw the little plates." But then I thought about how patiently adding just a little bit each week would eventually lead me to 400 by the end of the year, without really trying, at least in theory. So I'm sticking with the tiny rings. I guess the Easy Strength concept, or Wendler's prescription to start the 5/3/1 program lighter than feels necessary, is finally starting to make sense to me.
Anyway, thankfully, most of the links I tried on that All Things Gym list are defunct, so I don't need to get confused again by the endless possibilities of mixing and matching reps/sets/volume/frequency/intensity. I just got to stick with my current program and I'll be hitting PRs on all four of the performance lifts by summer sometime, every workout. Good motivation.
I guess the reason behind doing everything with the same rep-count in each workout is to stay with the same energy system or combination of energy systems, fiber types, blah, blah, blah, or whatever is involved with a different rep-count. Like almost all lifting protocols, the choice is fairly arbitrary. I could easily do a stage system like I did last summer/fall, or do some of the lifts 5 reps, some 8, some 1-3 in a single workout. I guess for the time being I'm going with the weekly Medium/Volume || Light/Dynamic || Heavy/Intensity alternation for all six lifts at a time. If nothing else, it makes the workouts more mindless, which is always a good thing.
That looks like a nice set-up. Eventually, I would like to have more variety like that as well, but for the moment, it's easiest for me to track progress by simply doing the same damn lifts every workout, just varying the rows and pulldowns.
One question about your set/rep variation. Is that a decision based on the feel of each lift, or are you doing more sets/reps for some because they are 'weak' compared to the others?
I think the fractional loading and linear progression will work fine as long as, like you are, wiling to start low enough. I'm a little too impatient and don't want to jump back down right now, so I left my progression open with a end of 8 weeks goal to hit. That may come on week 2, 5 or 8. But then I have the flexibility for some down or stable weeks if I am feeling out of it. Or I can have a good push week too. I think I prefer the full body thing to the split routine as well, mainly because you can push at lighter weights and still get the feel of a heavier workout. While still being able to complete the workout in a reasonable time.
The sets/reps thought was for the 4 lifts do the Dan John recommendation of the power of ten. The others were more from experience and the general strength recommendation for 5s and I can keep the weights lighter. Then higher rep 8s is mainly for the back stuff so I can speed through the workouts. Then its similar to what you are doing without the heavier higher reps. I might also gradually increase the weight to hit one heavy work set, and maybe do stage sets like that article?
So I have hit variation, multiple set/rep schemes. Am I missing anything?
One thing for us to keep in mind is that sometimes those guys are talking about advanced programs, sometimes beginner's, but they don't always contextualize it properly. I read somewhere that Yates would just do one heavy set, but that guy was so primed that that's probably all it took. I just go by feel. For the squat, for example, I can do four or five sets of five reps at 85%, but more than three sets of eight reps at 75% would feel like murder. Just three more reps in a set, even at 10% lighter, really changes things for me. Tomorrow, I might experiment a bit with the PaP/descending sets idea, as I think I mentioned a day or two ago (that's the second or third time T-Nation seems to have provided a timely article based on one of our discussions!), and start off with singles and doubles and then settle in for 2-3x3 straight sets across. The trick, for me, is to make it to the rows, my last lift, with enough energy to do a decent job with them. When I finish the rows, I'm usually ready to do a Roberto Duran impersonation and plead "no mas." Then I know I hit everything just right.
I think for you, all your focus should be on Leadville. Don't do any ST that might interfere with your preparation for that. Just finishing is plenty ambitious. I would put your lifting in maintenance mode, and maybe make use of this period to experiment a bit with different parameters and lift variations, as you just outlined in your chart.
Losing weight, I dunno. I simply can't diet. I'm counting on lifting and running in the long term. Now that I'm starting to run consistently again, my wife is already noticing my belly getting a bit smaller, even as I add weight in other areas from the lifting. Mainly my legs, butt and back I think. In your bench video you looked good, so I don't know why you're worried about weight. It would help you a bit in your ultras to lose weight, but if dieting made you weaker, it could also hurt you.
Yeah, I was thinking that, but tempo runs are usually defined as running at around one's lactate threshold. I dunno. I don't know Staley that well. Like you imply, he might be a Thibaudeau type who's all over the place programming-wise.
Well, I like the stripped down approach generally, and our workouts are already pretty minimalist. I don't know how you could strip your routine down much further frankly. I guess you could try an upper/lower split twice a week for a 4x per week routine. Just depends on how you're scheduling your aerobic work. I've never strayed too far from the EOD, 3x per week for both running and lifting. Whenever I try something else, it never lasts very long and I always come back to the simplicity of simply lifting on one day, and running on the other, with one day per week of complete rest, as god almighty intended the fitness universe. I think it was on the seventh day, during his recovery, that god really became stronger and began to rule the universe.
Well, I'm basing everything on the OH Press, and the necessity of rehabbing my deadlift slowly, so the weights I started with a few weeks ago are low but not arbitrary. The OH Press was, and probably still is, at my limit. The Squats are still a little low, but that's good because, since I've linked the deadlifts to the squats at a 5/4 ratio, it gives me extra weeks of training the deadlift at lower weights. This way I can continue to build confidence before I start hitting loads above 300lbs. I think it's also good to build the squats up slowly so I can really dial in the technique and make it absolutely automatic. The bench press still feels absurdly light at times, but that's also good because I've recently decided to hone my technique there too. If the load were closer to my maxes, it would be harder to focus on good form. Hopefully by this summer sometime, when my training maxes are close to 90% effort level again, the powerlifting bench set-up will be automatic.
I guess for me the bottom line for the sets/reps stuff and fullbody versus split is the importance of frequency and volume. With fractional loading a high frequency and volume approach becomes very practicable for me, and a lot of the guess work is removed. You put it well: "you can push at lighter weights and still get the feel of a heavier workout." Monday and Wednesday's workouts feel just as hard for me as Friday's workout, but by limiting my 'heavy day' to once a week, on Friday, I feel pretty confident that I'm giving my body plenty of time to recover and adapt properly. That's where the Texas Method of 'testing' one's maxes once a week comes into play. So the DUP weekly rhythm isn't arbitrary. Likewise, for running, a nice mix of Hills/Intervals, Tempo, and LSD should provoke a nice set of weekly adaptations that the body can easily recover from.
OK, that makes sense, re: your sets and reps. It'll be interesting to see how it unfolds. As always, a few sentences in your logs explaining how things are going helps me follow the progress and modifications.
Wow, you're writing a lot today, you really must be sick.
Yah, I feel a little impatient once in a while. But for me the clincher was when I was adjusting my 2015 log to the new fractional loading concept. I saw that by simply adding two pounds a week to my squat, I would hit 320 by the end of the year, and 400 for the deadlift. Likewise, for the presses, by adding a pound a week to the OH Press, I would end up with pretty good loads by yearend. Of course, I may stall at some point along the way and have to decrease the rate of fractional loading, but keeping my eyes on the year-end prize helps me remain patient. And, conversely, if I feel like the loads become too easy, I can always increase the rate of loading.
One other factor is staying injury-free. Although I don't think my deadlift injuries were a result of overtraining per se, I do like the idea of having a built-in mechanism that keeps me from making jumps before I'm ready, and regulates total work volume along the way.
Finally, a few people like Nuckols and Izzy have stressed the importance of building volume slowly, so that, ultimately, the (volume) base will support a higher (intensity) peak. If one increase loads too quickly, the theory goes, one may reach new PRs more quickly, but then ultimately plateau and find it difficult to reach higher. With a steady build up of volume, on the other hand, the PRs should just keep coming, because one's overall work capacity is much greater. I guess it's kind of the same idea in running of having one's training week consist of 20-35% quality work, and then the rest volume work, to build a base that will support the quality work.
Frick, Eric Cressey is pretty strong for his build!
ok guys, here is something that has been baking in my brain for a while, but the dough probably hasn't even risen yet, so it will be like rock-hard lumpy bread that is way too long.
i'm trying to think of a little framework in which to think about these tradeoffs between, say, "ultramarathon prowess" and "freakish strength". the model that comes to mind is that of the "production possibilities frontier".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Production–possibility_frontier
that is, fundamentally, we've been talking about starting with some reasonable, but finite inputs of "time" and "effort" (constrained by keeping wives and children happy, staying employed, etc) and then wondering what sorts of outputs we could get for running and lifting. so, in that article, they have a nifty diagram showing three major topologies available: the normal situation where the "PPF" bumps out roughly like a quarter circle, a perfect substitution case where it is a line, and then the concave case.
first of all, it seems to me that since (to my knowledge) none of us in this particular forum have been international or even national level athletes (at least recently), my guess is that we are far from the frontier. so the first order of business is to move ourselves from our endowment point (sadly, near the lower-left-hand corner of incompetence) to somewhere (anywhere!) on the actual frontier. at that point, we can concern ourselves about moving around on the frontier.
now, when you read the popular fitness press, i think that they make it sound like the PPF has that goofy concave shape. which makes sense: it is in their best interest to convince you that corner solutions (all lifting or all running) are the only reasonable ones because then it's easier to make you into an acolyte (to plagiarize abide's word) and establish a one-way pipeline from your pocketbook to theirs.
however, my hunch is that the PPF actually looks more like the usual rounded one. or possibly it even bends around backward close to the axes meaning that the best strength performance does not occur by completely ignoring running, but requires a tiny bit of running. and, the other way at the other end of the curve.
of course, we'll never really know the shape of that thing without trying to map it out somehow. and, gathering the data (even on one's self) would be highly problematic. still, i think i can happily confuse my model for reality and say that it feels like it really makes sense that there is way more complementarity between these activities that we have been crediting them with (despite being hopelessly optimistic compared to the mainstream fitness propaganda).
my tiny datapoint that i submit in support of this hypothesis is that recently i have been doing more squats with more weight on more days as well as running more miles on more days (and this is on a 2-week timescale) and the result has been that i am running faster than ever. for example, yesterday, i thought i wasn't feeling that great due to sleep deprivation and running really fast the previous day, so i thought i would take it easy. then i looked down and my GPS and was running, uh, way fast: much faster than it felt like. so i decided to go for it and ran my second fastest mile ever as part of an overall pretty fast run.
maybe that's the genius behind training camps (not that i've ever been to one). not so much that you learn new tricks or eat fancy foods, but that you actually *do* something every day for the duration of the event. and strangely, if you have any aptitude or potential and do something repeatedly, there is a good chance that you get better at it. magic!
again, all these wonderful things are probably happening because i am far from the production possibilities frontier (and tailwinds and warm weather). but, they encourage me into thinking that the PPF is farther out and has more interesting mixes available than i previously thought.
i'm trying to think of a little framework in which to think about these tradeoffs between, say, "ultramarathon prowess" and "freakish strength". the model that comes to mind is that of the "production possibilities frontier".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Production–possibility_frontier
that is, fundamentally, we've been talking about starting with some reasonable, but finite inputs of "time" and "effort" (constrained by keeping wives and children happy, staying employed, etc) and then wondering what sorts of outputs we could get for running and lifting. so, in that article, they have a nifty diagram showing three major topologies available: the normal situation where the "PPF" bumps out roughly like a quarter circle, a perfect substitution case where it is a line, and then the concave case.
first of all, it seems to me that since (to my knowledge) none of us in this particular forum have been international or even national level athletes (at least recently), my guess is that we are far from the frontier. so the first order of business is to move ourselves from our endowment point (sadly, near the lower-left-hand corner of incompetence) to somewhere (anywhere!) on the actual frontier. at that point, we can concern ourselves about moving around on the frontier.
now, when you read the popular fitness press, i think that they make it sound like the PPF has that goofy concave shape. which makes sense: it is in their best interest to convince you that corner solutions (all lifting or all running) are the only reasonable ones because then it's easier to make you into an acolyte (to plagiarize abide's word) and establish a one-way pipeline from your pocketbook to theirs.
however, my hunch is that the PPF actually looks more like the usual rounded one. or possibly it even bends around backward close to the axes meaning that the best strength performance does not occur by completely ignoring running, but requires a tiny bit of running. and, the other way at the other end of the curve.
of course, we'll never really know the shape of that thing without trying to map it out somehow. and, gathering the data (even on one's self) would be highly problematic. still, i think i can happily confuse my model for reality and say that it feels like it really makes sense that there is way more complementarity between these activities that we have been crediting them with (despite being hopelessly optimistic compared to the mainstream fitness propaganda).
my tiny datapoint that i submit in support of this hypothesis is that recently i have been doing more squats with more weight on more days as well as running more miles on more days (and this is on a 2-week timescale) and the result has been that i am running faster than ever. for example, yesterday, i thought i wasn't feeling that great due to sleep deprivation and running really fast the previous day, so i thought i would take it easy. then i looked down and my GPS and was running, uh, way fast: much faster than it felt like. so i decided to go for it and ran my second fastest mile ever as part of an overall pretty fast run.
maybe that's the genius behind training camps (not that i've ever been to one). not so much that you learn new tricks or eat fancy foods, but that you actually *do* something every day for the duration of the event. and strangely, if you have any aptitude or potential and do something repeatedly, there is a good chance that you get better at it. magic!
again, all these wonderful things are probably happening because i am far from the production possibilities frontier (and tailwinds and warm weather). but, they encourage me into thinking that the PPF is farther out and has more interesting mixes available than i previously thought.
I agree, and that's a great explanation.
I think part of the problem is that people are trying to optimize one or the other, because they are chasing the pretty ribbons. Like you say, we're not going to be crowned champions by anyone anytime soon except perhaps in our fat neighbor's nightmares, so we can forget about realizing that last 10-20 percent of our genetic potential, which is where all those finely tune training programs come into play, as well as having to make training trade-offs. If you want to achieve 80% of your potential, any intermediate program will do, it's just a matter of whether it's good, better, or best in terms of catering to your inclinations.
Nuckols and a few others argue that cardio aids lifting because it builds work capacity. Most runners these days seem to realize that at least a little ST can help their running. So the question is how to optimize the two in concurrent training, which is how Abide's original thread on Optimal Strength Training for Runners began, before it devolved mostly into a discussion about lifting, with Abide disabusing me of most of my naive notions, and patiently educating me about the various lifting protocols.
Those graphs try to model optimality. Optimality was the big buzzword in vogue in linguistics in the 1990s. Like flannel shirts in Seattle.
Anyway, in my case, performance in either running or lifting is really secondary to general fitness, so I don't feel any real pressure to have to chose between time with one or the other. I simply split it down the middle, running one hour (ideally) one day, and lifting one hour the other. Then, within each hour, I try to 'do the right thing' (e.g., How many reps? Run hills today?). Sometimes on the weekend I'll run for two hours, just because Ican could/will be able to.
Not sure if an approximately even split between cardio and st is optimal, but it's easy to schedule. A lot of people would argue just 10-20 minutes of intervals 2 to 3 times a week is all you need for cardio, but that seems absurd to me. Why wouldn't you want to develop half-assed endurance capacity by running aerobically for a decent distance once or twice a week? I can't imagine fitness without some kind of endurance component, just as it would be strange to pursue fitness without any st, although many of my friends do this, and look down on st as fitness for Neanderthals.
Likewise, for us novice and intermediate fitness types, according to several people I've read recently, the whole overtraining bugaboo has been greatly exaggerated. Most of us are still undertraining. An hour a day of exercise with sufficient rest and nutrition probably isn't going to be enough overtrain anyone. I used to ride a bicycle about eight hours or 100 miles a day, with spotty nutrition oftentimes, and did just fine. Sometimes I felt fatigued, it's true, so I would take a day or two off when the opportunity presented itself, which it often did because I was a tourist. But I would often ride 5-6 days a week when covering large distances with little population or points of interest besides the landscapes.
This last Tuesday I ran hills and pushed it a little more than I had previously. Yesterday I was pretty sore and the first set of squats felt heavy. But then I loosened up, and today I feel sore in a slightly different way. All I want is intermediate levels of fitness in both running and lifting, and anyway, most economistic notions are just cultural concepts parading as mathematical objectivity. The idea of scarcity, for example, can be traced back through Western thought to Genesis.
It's you guys running ultras that may have to get religion. I remain an agnostic of mediocrity, like Charlie Brown.
So what I'm saying is that so far, I haven't noticed too much interference, and perhaps some synergy. But unlike BA, I've never really trained ST and Running well at the same time, so this summer and fall will be a good test of his idea. My legs have felt pretty strong on the hills though, a good sign the squats have helped, and I know my posture is a lot better since I started taking deadlifts seriously last year.
I think part of the problem is that people are trying to optimize one or the other, because they are chasing the pretty ribbons. Like you say, we're not going to be crowned champions by anyone anytime soon except perhaps in our fat neighbor's nightmares, so we can forget about realizing that last 10-20 percent of our genetic potential, which is where all those finely tune training programs come into play, as well as having to make training trade-offs. If you want to achieve 80% of your potential, any intermediate program will do, it's just a matter of whether it's good, better, or best in terms of catering to your inclinations.
Nuckols and a few others argue that cardio aids lifting because it builds work capacity. Most runners these days seem to realize that at least a little ST can help their running. So the question is how to optimize the two in concurrent training, which is how Abide's original thread on Optimal Strength Training for Runners began, before it devolved mostly into a discussion about lifting, with Abide disabusing me of most of my naive notions, and patiently educating me about the various lifting protocols.
Those graphs try to model optimality. Optimality was the big buzzword in vogue in linguistics in the 1990s. Like flannel shirts in Seattle.
Anyway, in my case, performance in either running or lifting is really secondary to general fitness, so I don't feel any real pressure to have to chose between time with one or the other. I simply split it down the middle, running one hour (ideally) one day, and lifting one hour the other. Then, within each hour, I try to 'do the right thing' (e.g., How many reps? Run hills today?). Sometimes on the weekend I'll run for two hours, just because I
Not sure if an approximately even split between cardio and st is optimal, but it's easy to schedule. A lot of people would argue just 10-20 minutes of intervals 2 to 3 times a week is all you need for cardio, but that seems absurd to me. Why wouldn't you want to develop half-assed endurance capacity by running aerobically for a decent distance once or twice a week? I can't imagine fitness without some kind of endurance component, just as it would be strange to pursue fitness without any st, although many of my friends do this, and look down on st as fitness for Neanderthals.
Likewise, for us novice and intermediate fitness types, according to several people I've read recently, the whole overtraining bugaboo has been greatly exaggerated. Most of us are still undertraining. An hour a day of exercise with sufficient rest and nutrition probably isn't going to be enough overtrain anyone. I used to ride a bicycle about eight hours or 100 miles a day, with spotty nutrition oftentimes, and did just fine. Sometimes I felt fatigued, it's true, so I would take a day or two off when the opportunity presented itself, which it often did because I was a tourist. But I would often ride 5-6 days a week when covering large distances with little population or points of interest besides the landscapes.
This last Tuesday I ran hills and pushed it a little more than I had previously. Yesterday I was pretty sore and the first set of squats felt heavy. But then I loosened up, and today I feel sore in a slightly different way. All I want is intermediate levels of fitness in both running and lifting, and anyway, most economistic notions are just cultural concepts parading as mathematical objectivity. The idea of scarcity, for example, can be traced back through Western thought to Genesis.
It's you guys running ultras that may have to get religion. I remain an agnostic of mediocrity, like Charlie Brown.
So what I'm saying is that so far, I haven't noticed too much interference, and perhaps some synergy. But unlike BA, I've never really trained ST and Running well at the same time, so this summer and fall will be a good test of his idea. My legs have felt pretty strong on the hills though, a good sign the squats have helped, and I know my posture is a lot better since I started taking deadlifts seriously last year.
Man, now I'm really feeling like busting out some singles this aft.
Edit: Hey, one thing I'm not getting. It seemed like your plan for this cycle was going according to plan, but lately you've been expressing dissatisfaction. What exactly is it that's not working? Just curious.
Edit2@BA: If you don't mind sharing, how fast was your second fastest mile? Just curious. Hey also, why did you stop reporting runs?
I know that article made me want to try that idea out, but I think this leads into one of the issues I have been having.
The biggest thing right now is I am kind of missing that steady relatively easy lifting. With the split workout I am doing, its basically doing my training max +, which is probably hitting around 95% of my 1RM for one or two lifts per day. Which isn't necessarily bad but it is time consuming and a mental drain. Leading into my second problem.
I think my loads are just too high to hit 3-6 @ 90% worksets. Charles Staley's concept of lifting one top workset is sounding like a good plan right now. Especially trying to weave it together with my other nonsense going on. And you are right I should be focusing on Leadville, and the other races coming up.
Even though the 6 lifts may be more complicated written down the simplicity of just waking up and getting into the gym will help getting through the whole workout fast and consistently. While working all the lifts or patterns with more regularity instead of once a week. Plus I have a little more flexibility with loads which I think will come in handy especially after a race.
My main concern with constant progression like yours is kind of similar to what I expressed above, once I get to a certain weight in a lift it becomes a mental f$*!. Then I don't hit my reps and its becomes a disappointment. I think that's why easy strength and the RPE method fit well with my personality. I can just adjust daily on load and still think I got a solid workout in, not great but that's ok. Having a very specific plan for every day doesn't give me that flexibility and take some of the fun out of it.
Sorry about the sob story ha!
Glad to hear your foot is healing. I seem to have a 70/30 split between good and sucks ass running days. Although once I get past the 6 mile point they mostly all become good. Maybe you need to start doing ultras?
No, that's what these threads are all about, sharing ideas but also experiences, right?
I think I'm not explaining my new approach very well, because I think it does cover your concerns. It's flexible in that you can of course always drop sets or reps or even lifts if you're having an off day. With a full body, high frequency approach, you do the same damn six lifts every workout, so it doesn't really matter if one day once in a while isn't that great. Just call it a recovery or deload day and write it off. You don't have to wait a week to do any of the lifts again. You'll do them all next workout. On Wednesday, for example, my family came home before I could do my cable rows. No biggie, I'll be doing 1DB rows today.
And you can even reset the load if it feels heavy although that is unlikely to happen because the increases are so gradual and the rate of increase can easily be manipulated. At some point my one- and two-pound per week increases will be too much, and then I'll either reduce the rate of increase, or increase the time between increases. Simple. The main thing is to keep the workouts at the same challenging but doable level like they are now. It's kind of like running, without a Garmin at least. You just keep plugging away and, even though you have some bad days, slowly but surely you get faster. With weights it's a little harder to feel that gradual progress because of the five-, ten-, or twenty-pound jumps. But with fractional plates I can reduce the jumps to as little as half a pound. It's like increasing your pace by a few seconds per mile--you don't even notice.
Overall my workouts have become very workaday for me and I no longer have those days where I'm a little nervous about being able to make a lift with good form or complete reps after a five- or ten-pound increase. I know I can make them all, because my overall effort-level is constant and never more than 90%. Whenever I have doubts about longterm progress using the easy, gradual approach, I just re-read the beginning of Wendler's 2009 5/3/1 book (http://crossfitssli.typepad.com/files/531-strength-program.pdf). Right now, of course, only my OH Press and maybe my Squat are at training max, but if I start to feel wiped out by my workouts when the Bench and Deadlift approach my maxes, I can reduce the total number of sets, maybe even just do two sets per lift when they get really heavy. Progress might slower, but it will still happen.
But you're right in that with my highly specific plan, there will be a certain amount of boredom. Counteracting this, however, is the fact that I'm already hitting weekly PRs in my OH Press, and will be hitting regular PRs in my other lifts by mid or late summer. So that's pretty motivating for me. The path to a 400 deadlift doesn't seem so long now, because there's lots of pit stops and scenic outlooks along the way. After I hit my old PR of 355 for example, I'm steadily working towards 360, then 370 and so on, or even just 356.
Also, if it starts to get boring, I'll start to work in variation or substitution lifts, like we've been discussing this week. I'll still be working the same sets of muscles involved in each of the six lifts, but it will keep things fresh and may also benefit longterm progress by mixing up the angles or grips and so on a little bit.
Finally, viewing the routine as more of a template, you could, for example, easily make Friday into a stage workout as described in that T-Nation article, or make the 8RM day even more of a dynamic effort day by decreasing the loads.
So I dunno, for me at least, it does seem like a "steady, relatively easy lifting" approach. You're the one who got me thinking along these lines originally. But it took me a while to understand the concept, and how it could be more effective than a more intensive approach over the long haul. Of course, the experiment is still young, but it's feeling pretty good so far.
i don't know the "official" time because it involves remembering the beginning and end times on my GPS while running between marks painted onto the path (presumably by the local running club). i think it was about 5:54 or something. a year ago, i went running with my kid on a bike and when i looked down after the first 1/4 mile, i realized it was really fast and decided to go for it and did a 5:45 or so. i wasn't sure if that was a malfunctioning "device" or not, but apparently, it might have been legit. those are the only two under 6 i've ever done knowingly. i think my best for high school PE class was like 6:12 or something. of course, in high school, we would stop after finishing and now i keep on running...
i'm not exactly sure why i haven't been recording runs. in part, it is because i'm usually running 5 or 6 days a week for a total of 30 or 40 miles and i want to maintain humility and not bore you guys to tears. on the other hand, if y'all think it would be helpful, i suppose i could. it's terribly unstructured because i still don't really consider myself to be a "runner" and feel like i'm still at the phase where the trick to getting better is to just go out and zoom around a lot.
Yah, I was a little bummed that it was a little tender after yesterday's run, which puts it back in the category of 'manageable' instead of 'healed,' but it's definitely getting better. I'm pretty sure I'm going to try a six-mile run/walk tomorrow. I can't hardly wait until I can run continuously again. It's been hard to be this patient, but I think my rehab approach has been the correct one. And now I'm super paranoid about stubbing my toes again.
That's pretty respectable. I think my best in 2013 was 8mm, and I didn't keep running. I would be super happy if I could consistently run that pace over 5-6 miles. I don't think I'll ever touch 6mm unless I'm sprinting!
And yes, I think it would be good to include your running in the training log/diary. We have renamed the thread Concurrent Strength Training & Running, after all. And we're all thinking, to some extent anyways, about how they fit together, so it would be nice to compare notes, even if you and Abide are running at a totally different level than I am. Hopefully my running will become a little more interesting sometime later this year, and not the narrative of continue rehab and fitness restoration.
As for boring people to tears, my lengthy posts already got that covered!
Edit: speaking of which here's what my load projections look like assuming an impossibly steady rate of increase:
Hey sorry I wasn't meaning that as a dig to your plan at all or that what you are doing is boring. Since I will likely just adopt a very similar thing.
Mainly I feel like you are right in making me think about where my focus should be and lifting should be secondary. So having an excessively flexible plan with a few basic foci in the garage right now is probably the best course of action.
I think ultimately the split plan like Wendler's is probably the quickest way to develop strength. However when you are on that plan you really need to focus every session to make sure the stimuli is adequate and then resting appropriately as you stated. It seems once you start sprinkling other stuff in the plan the ability of adding weight and reps becomes stunted and overall the effectiveness drops.
Which leads me back to the original plan, basically a variant of what you guys are running. I think this is where DJ's ideas become important as he is often working with people who are competing in something while trying to get stronger. I guess you could break it down to a few things:
Consistency - obvious
Easy - I think this is the most important, he states easy but I think I would look at it more like the common phrase "never miss a rep"
Progression - gradual small improvements over a realistic period of time, but also including progression from all formats
Comprehensive - the 6 movements basically
Do no harm - I think this one is important from a couple of different perspectives obviously from an injury standpoint, but also from a strength maintenance angle and intereference in other sports. The bare minimum should be no loss of strength with as little as possible interference.
I guess all of this should essentially be my objective for each cycle. I think the last cycle I just simply overreached and was likely trying to push too many things at once?
Anyway Lee I think you are very cued into the progression standpoint and honestly if you take the next 8 month to roll through that I think you will be very successful especially with your built in corrections if you need them. Thanks for explaining it in a little more detail.
BTW there are a couple points in this article that I read yesterday that I found interesting and related:
http://www.strengtheory.com/powerlifters-should-train-more-like-bodybuilders/
So, what can we take away from all of this?
•It’s undeniable that improved neural/motor learning factors will let you lift more via improved muscle activation, more efficient technique, better neuromuscular coordination (increased activation of synergist muscles and decreased activation of antagonist muscles) but…
•You can master a motor pattern over time with just about any training frequency, as has been demonstrated by elite strength athletes throughout time. Maybe increased training frequency will allow you to master a movement quicker, but if you’re planning on lifting for years and years, you’ll reach mastery regardless of training frequency (keep in mind, I’m talking about the relatively non-technical power lifts, not the more technical Olympic lifts).
So frequency of a lift doesn't matter in the long run, well for us if we are gonna keep doing this for years. I think this fits in with me rotating 3 lifts per movement.
For muscle growth, volume is priority No. 1. There are two basic ways to go about accruing this volume:
- Train “like a powerlifter” (heavy sets of 1-5, but more of them).
- Train “like a bodybuilder” (mainly sets of 8-12)
So if you can gain the same amount of muscle with ¼ the time in the gym, that probably means that, in the real world, the 3×10 group would have ended up gaining even more mass than the 7×3 group, because they had the desire and the ability to handle more volume than the study protocol allowed for.
I think this one is interesting simply because of his personal conclusion that the study participants spent less time in the gym (which is perfect for me). And they were not wrecked at the end of it. Which also is something I want right now to help intertwine my lifting and running. That leads me into thinking that adding higher rep lifts in each day might help keep the mental motivation up. I just need to focus on keeping the loads reasonable so I don't burnout.
Alright now I am motivated I am going to take a run at that first day to see how it goes.
Support Your Club
Forum statistics
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Get Your 2024 Wildwood Barefoot Country Music Fest Tickets Here- Latest: stjohnthegambler
