According to that guy's theory, I'm definitely a fast-twitch kind of guy. I think my 5RM and 8RM are probably lower than my programmed 85% and 75%. Or in other words, I could probably do my 1-3RMs a little heavier. Like today, when I do my 1RM OH Press at 150, I might feel like I could probably have done 155 if I really had to. But I think it's good to keep the 1RMs as a training max rather than a true max. The 5RM and 8RM come much closer to true maxes, which I understood as the nature of the rep-count but maybe it has something to do with my fiber composition. After a while, it just starts to get to be too much to think about though. For the upper body pulls, I would think that medium, neutral grip probably recruits the fast-twitch prime movers more than the other grips, which bring secondary and stabilizing muscles more into play, which tend to be more slow-twitch, especially the stabilizers. That's a problem with that article--how do you even test a 1RM on something like a Pendlay Row? If the weight is light enough that you can do it with strict form, chances are you could do another rep or two if you had too. What do you mean by progression here? I mean just increasing loads or volume. Nothing complicated. OK, thanks for the clarification. Yeah testing the lifts is probably impractical. Also something different I have noticed. I have much more capacity for doing multiple sets of heavy lifts for the bench but the opposite is true for the press. Usually I only have one good set per workout for the press. That's probably an indication about the muscle type as well. But there is very likely variation between muscle types within your body. Or maybe that is a product of years of development for patterns. Hmnn, I don't know about that one, I haven't ever really pushed the OH Press like I have the Bench Press in the past, so it's hard to say what a heavy session of, for example, several singles and then multiple drop sets would be like. I have been able to do the 1/2/3 descending sets, but those are more controlled and less intensive than the way I used to do drop sets with the Bench. One thing I agreed with in that article is that it does seem like you can squat pretty much every day. I've been surprised how easy it is after a hills workout. The first few warm-up sets kind of suck, but once the tightness from the previous day's hill runs has been removed, the worksets proceed just fine. I wonder if the OH Press is like that too, and also the chin-up, as something that tolerates greater frequency, for whatever reason, be it muscle fiber, greater structural balance, or what have you ... That article did say that the muscle fiber test will only work for relatively isolating lifts, right? With compound lifts, you have all sorts of muscle fiber types coming into play. I think that's one of the ideas behind accessory lifts, in that you work the slow-twitch muscles, like stabilizers, that are involved in the main lifts, but in isolation, so that they may lend greater support to the prime movers targeted in the main lifts. That's why it's useful for me to make the distinction between lift variation and substitute, on the one hand, and lift accessory on the other. Then again, that T-Nation article on Kroc versus Pendlay describes lifts that target the upper back as accessory for this reason: "And we need to remember what the upper back is – a major link, but not the prime mover in the squat, deadlift, or bench press. A strong back reinforces the spine and resists the barbell, so when we think of rowing, we need to remember that a combination of size, density and endurance is more important than 1RM strength or explosiveness." In this sense, it's not so much that the lift doesn't target a prime mover, because the upper body pulls do target the lats, the prime mover in the upper back, but that it doesn't target a prime mover in a performance lift. Since I'm not a competitive powerlifter, I don't know if I agree with this definition, but I understand the point. Because I want general strength, I think there is value in targeting the lats using both low-rep 'main lifts' and high-rep 'accessory lifts.' Hence my variation between 3-8 reps for the various types pulldowns and rows. Really heavy 1DB Rows target the lats, but higher rep, Kroc style DB Rows help build the general "size, density, and endurance" of the upper back so that it will hold up under heavy deadlifting. Yeah that is recommended hit your training max and do drop sets if you want to do some extra work. Just keep doing what your doing this is just mental stimulus that probably shouldn't be translated to the garage. That's a good way to put it. When I was re-reading the Broz article, my initial reaction is "whoa, I should try that sometime." But then there's Westside saying just the opposite. Reading the two articles back-to-back was a great reminder that there are many ways to skin the proverbial cat. It is good mental stimulus however, and the more ideas you're exposed to, the more clearly you can develop your own program and make adjustments, both in general programming, and during workouts. Those articles and this discussion have really helped solidify my decision to try doing two different kinds of rows each workout. I think it might be beneficial. Good luck on your race this weekend BTW.