I'm cheating.
I admit it openly and with no shame.
Today was supposed to be a rest day. The training calendar shows a big blank spot for this day. But I just couldn't do it. I had to do something. The reasons are pretty simple, one defensible, the other? Well, you decide.
On the one hand, since I'm doing the whole 20-rep squat thing, I've decided that I need to squat more than once a week. Please do not scream at me like that. Even when I followed the hard-gainer plan I developed for myself after reading Brawn and Beyond Brawn, I felt that I needed more than one day a week of leg work, so on deadlift days I'd squeeze in some leg presses in addition to the squats I'd do on designated leg days. It worked well, so I see no reason not to continue sneaking in an additional set of squats here and there.
Once I made up my mind to give the 20-rep squats a try, I'd already planned on squatting more than once a week. Since Wednesday is nicely sandwiched between deadlift and bench press day, it seemed the perfect opportunity for at least one set of squats.
So that's one reason I cheated. The other is, well, more a matter of vanity or competitiveness, I suppose. You see, I signed on for a challenge on Fitocracy in the 5/3/1 Raw Strength group. Whoever earns the most points by May 21 wins. Wins what, you ask? Um ... nothing tangible, really. Just a bunch of people saying, "Way to go!" Because of this, I added several sets of barbell curls and dumbbell curls to the workout. My routine doesn't even call for biceps curls! I feel so cheap and dirty.
Sadly, I'm currently fourth out of six participants. Six!
And that's why I have to flipping cheat!
If I follow this Wendler 5/3/1 plan to the letter, then next week is actually supposed to be a deload week. Am I going to deload and risk embarrassing myself in the competition? Hell, no! I'm going to throw those barbells around with reckless abandon!
Tomorrow is bench press day with dumbbell bench press and Kroc rows thrown in for assistance work. No messing around in this workout. I'm going to go running in like Bruce Banner's pea-green alter ego and screaming like Sean Cassidy's Banshee.
Only problem is, the heaviest dumbbell I own is a 65-pounder, so I'm either going to have to do a lot of reps and a lot of sets or find some practical way to increase the amount of weight I'm lifting in each set. The bench press is no problem; I have well over 300 pounds of weight to throw on that bar. The question is how I can milk the most point-value out of the dumbbell bench presses and Kroc rows.
You see? It's crazy! I'm thinking like a crazy man just because I signed up for the "Brawl for it All" challenge.
Fitocracy makes me crazy.
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Time to push
I feel like I've turned the corner in my routine. It reached a point where I felt I was struggling to get through each workout. Each lift just felt heavy, and each rep was fighting me. But now, I believe I've weakened the evil Dr. Gravity's defenses. His weapons affect me less and less each day. Today, I dealt Dr. Gravity a serious blow.
It was deadlift day in my 5/3/1 routine. It's also week 3 of the cycle, which means this is the heaviest week followed by a deload. I was supposed to finish off my deadlift with at least one rep at 290. Instead, I did three reps at 295. But it felt too easy. It was an anticlimax to my victory over Dr. Gravity. So I followed that up with a set of three reps at 315. No, it's not the most I've ever deadlifted, but it is the most I've lifted in at least two years. I finished with a set of five at 275 as a warm-down.
Tomorrow is an off day, luckily, and if the weather holds, I'm going to mow the lawn so I have a nice flat space to do my farmer's walks on Saturday. I still need to find a big fat tractor tire, though. Not sure where to begin looking, but somebody around here's bound to have one lying around, overgrown with weeds.
After the off day it's bench press, and my plan is to follow the same pattern as today. Yeah, I'm kind of cheating on the 5/3/1 plan, but it feels too good right now not to push the envelope and do as much as I can. If I'm truly making next week a deload week as the plan instructs, then I might as well go all-out this week and raise the bar. But I would like to see that deadlift get back into the mid 300s where it was before. I think I could very well do it next Tuesday if I don't deload. Maybe I'll do the one heavy set and then follow up with some lighter work. Maybe.
The old strength is returning, and the vile Dr. Gravity is beginning to know the icy embrace of fear. Now, I just need to get my diet in order. That means climbing the mount once again and returning to the teachings of the Exalted One, Tom Venuto. BFFM, here I come.
It was deadlift day in my 5/3/1 routine. It's also week 3 of the cycle, which means this is the heaviest week followed by a deload. I was supposed to finish off my deadlift with at least one rep at 290. Instead, I did three reps at 295. But it felt too easy. It was an anticlimax to my victory over Dr. Gravity. So I followed that up with a set of three reps at 315. No, it's not the most I've ever deadlifted, but it is the most I've lifted in at least two years. I finished with a set of five at 275 as a warm-down.
Tomorrow is an off day, luckily, and if the weather holds, I'm going to mow the lawn so I have a nice flat space to do my farmer's walks on Saturday. I still need to find a big fat tractor tire, though. Not sure where to begin looking, but somebody around here's bound to have one lying around, overgrown with weeds.
After the off day it's bench press, and my plan is to follow the same pattern as today. Yeah, I'm kind of cheating on the 5/3/1 plan, but it feels too good right now not to push the envelope and do as much as I can. If I'm truly making next week a deload week as the plan instructs, then I might as well go all-out this week and raise the bar. But I would like to see that deadlift get back into the mid 300s where it was before. I think I could very well do it next Tuesday if I don't deload. Maybe I'll do the one heavy set and then follow up with some lighter work. Maybe.
The old strength is returning, and the vile Dr. Gravity is beginning to know the icy embrace of fear. Now, I just need to get my diet in order. That means climbing the mount once again and returning to the teachings of the Exalted One, Tom Venuto. BFFM, here I come.
Wendler 5/3/1 Week 3
I've just started week three of Wendler's 5/3/1 plan. Next week is supposed to be a deload week, but I may instead crank things up a notch. The reason is simple: My body feels rested and ready to be challenged. The structure of the plan means that I'm not overworking myself--my body has plenty of time to recover. Too many cookie-cutter routines just aren't suited to everyone. For me, the Wendler plan had a clear ring of truth to it.
The last couple of weeks, I started realizing how much the SL 5x5 plan was taxing me. But don't you want to be taxed? Isn't that the point? In a word, no. Yes, the idea is certainly to challenge your level of fitness, to challenge your muscles to grow and get stronger (don't get me started on that whole hypertrophy vs. strength crap again). The problem is, without proper recovery, the only result is going to be frustration.
You can see progress on any program--and I mean any program--for at least the first few weeks. It's what happens in the following weeks that should tell you whether it's the right program for you or not. SL was great--for the first two months. After that, I started to hit the wall and was facing those same old frustrations all over again. Let me state quite clearly right now that I have nothing against the SL 5x5 plan. Many, many people will follow it religiously and will have a lot of success with it, but I suspect more than a few others, like myself, will hit the wall.
It's natural when that happens to blame yourself. You make all kinds of excuses that point to you: Oh, I was trying to progress too quickly; I wasn't eating enough; I wasn't trying hard enough, etc.
Often these roadblocks occur for none of these reasons. It often boils down to a simple issue: You're probably overtraining. You're probably following a plan that just isn't right for you.
When I started lifting decades ago, I followed all kinds of ridiculous plans that were tailor made for guys who had a genetic predisposition toward bigger muscles or for guys who were using performance enhancers. Yes, I made some progress, but you'd hardly know it from looking at me that I lifted regularly. I was getting nowhere. Finally, at some point, I stopped blaming myself and my commitment and instead started thinking in terms of following a program that was geared more toward regular guys.
That brings me to why Wendler may be the better program for me. First, it's a split routine. For some reason I cannot fathom, it seems that "split routine" is becoming a dirty word (okay, two words). The idea of the whole-body workout is coming back with a vengeance. Back in the olden days when I was first getting into weight training, the Law was to do three full-body workouts per week. Again, that's a fine plan and will work just great for many people--for the first month or so, maybe two.
Split routines have a number of advantages, the most important of which is that you typically don't do multiple "big" lifts in the same workout. Think about it: If you do five sets of squats at a weight close to or at your 5RM, how much are you going to have left in the tank to do a set of deadlifts? Every ounce of effort you spend on one big lift takes away from another.
Following a split routine lets you focus more one big lift at a time and gives your body more time to recover for the next workout.
I discovered early on that I made the fastest and biggest strength gains when I separated the big lifts.
Another reason the Wendler plan fits me better is that it incorporates periodization. This is another strategy to slowly ramp up workout intensities and to occasionally give your body a break to recover. You build up to your most intense week and then back off before ramping back up. Experts keep recommending it because it works.
Yes, you're right--progress on such a plan is gradual. And it should be. The number one mistake every beginning and intermediate lifter makes is trying to climb the ladder too quickly. For people like me that's an especially huge mistake that will lead to nothing but failure and frustration. In the game of strength and mass building, slow and steady is the way to go. Impatience is never rewarded in weight training.
And then there's the 5/3/1 assistance work. I am a firm believer that no routine is complete without chins and dips. The idea of doing more high volume work after the primary lift makes sense to me. Following the Triumverate provides plenty of variety in the exercise repertoire. And there are no hard and fast rules about what you do--it's entirely up to you. Just go for reps and volume after the main workout. Let me tell you, it feels great.
Sure, I grant you, most plans look good on paper; it's the results that matter. I can provide my own anecdotal evidence that 5/3/1 is working for me.
The first thing I noticed is that the OHP, or standing military press or whatever you like to call it, isn't kicking my butt any more. On SL I made some good linear progress up until I hit 115 lbs. Part of the problem was that after doing five sets of squats at close to my 5RM, I was pretty sapped. In one workout I was able to perform five sets of five at 115. The next time around after the squats nearly did me in, I could barely get three reps. The next week, I pulled some plates off and went to a lower weight. That's obviously not what anyone wants to do. Those offering advice suggested maybe I wasn't eating enough to maintain my energy level. Bull. I know I'm eating enough because I've actually gained weight over the last couple of months. The fact is, I'm heavier now than I ever have been in my entire life. And I'm consuming plenty of protein, so that couldn't be it.
Yesterday, I was able to do 10 reps at 105 in my last and heaviest set. Wendler doesn't advocate working to failure on sets, but he does say on the last set to do as many as you can. Ten reps at 105 was pretty easy, to tell you the truth. If I've erred in any way following 5/3/1 it's that I underestimated my 1RMs on everything. And that's fine. Wendler even recommends low-balling it at first.
If you take a little visit to the Fitocracy forums for the SL group, you'll find a common theme. At least one day a week someone will complain that they're having trouble with the OHP. The idea of switching from the SL plan, however, is never considered. It's always "eat more" or do this exercise or that exercise.
I'm also seeing an improvement in the deadlift. I'll be finishing up today at 295 for as many reps as I can do. Based on last week, I'm guessing I can do at least three. I'm going to try for five.
It's up to every individual to experiment and find out what works best for them. Strict adherence to a cookie-cutter program is likely to stymie anyone who isn't willing to consider alternatives.
The last couple of weeks, I started realizing how much the SL 5x5 plan was taxing me. But don't you want to be taxed? Isn't that the point? In a word, no. Yes, the idea is certainly to challenge your level of fitness, to challenge your muscles to grow and get stronger (don't get me started on that whole hypertrophy vs. strength crap again). The problem is, without proper recovery, the only result is going to be frustration.
You can see progress on any program--and I mean any program--for at least the first few weeks. It's what happens in the following weeks that should tell you whether it's the right program for you or not. SL was great--for the first two months. After that, I started to hit the wall and was facing those same old frustrations all over again. Let me state quite clearly right now that I have nothing against the SL 5x5 plan. Many, many people will follow it religiously and will have a lot of success with it, but I suspect more than a few others, like myself, will hit the wall.
It's natural when that happens to blame yourself. You make all kinds of excuses that point to you: Oh, I was trying to progress too quickly; I wasn't eating enough; I wasn't trying hard enough, etc.
Often these roadblocks occur for none of these reasons. It often boils down to a simple issue: You're probably overtraining. You're probably following a plan that just isn't right for you.
When I started lifting decades ago, I followed all kinds of ridiculous plans that were tailor made for guys who had a genetic predisposition toward bigger muscles or for guys who were using performance enhancers. Yes, I made some progress, but you'd hardly know it from looking at me that I lifted regularly. I was getting nowhere. Finally, at some point, I stopped blaming myself and my commitment and instead started thinking in terms of following a program that was geared more toward regular guys.
That brings me to why Wendler may be the better program for me. First, it's a split routine. For some reason I cannot fathom, it seems that "split routine" is becoming a dirty word (okay, two words). The idea of the whole-body workout is coming back with a vengeance. Back in the olden days when I was first getting into weight training, the Law was to do three full-body workouts per week. Again, that's a fine plan and will work just great for many people--for the first month or so, maybe two.
Split routines have a number of advantages, the most important of which is that you typically don't do multiple "big" lifts in the same workout. Think about it: If you do five sets of squats at a weight close to or at your 5RM, how much are you going to have left in the tank to do a set of deadlifts? Every ounce of effort you spend on one big lift takes away from another.
Following a split routine lets you focus more one big lift at a time and gives your body more time to recover for the next workout.
I discovered early on that I made the fastest and biggest strength gains when I separated the big lifts.
Another reason the Wendler plan fits me better is that it incorporates periodization. This is another strategy to slowly ramp up workout intensities and to occasionally give your body a break to recover. You build up to your most intense week and then back off before ramping back up. Experts keep recommending it because it works.
Yes, you're right--progress on such a plan is gradual. And it should be. The number one mistake every beginning and intermediate lifter makes is trying to climb the ladder too quickly. For people like me that's an especially huge mistake that will lead to nothing but failure and frustration. In the game of strength and mass building, slow and steady is the way to go. Impatience is never rewarded in weight training.
And then there's the 5/3/1 assistance work. I am a firm believer that no routine is complete without chins and dips. The idea of doing more high volume work after the primary lift makes sense to me. Following the Triumverate provides plenty of variety in the exercise repertoire. And there are no hard and fast rules about what you do--it's entirely up to you. Just go for reps and volume after the main workout. Let me tell you, it feels great.
Sure, I grant you, most plans look good on paper; it's the results that matter. I can provide my own anecdotal evidence that 5/3/1 is working for me.
The first thing I noticed is that the OHP, or standing military press or whatever you like to call it, isn't kicking my butt any more. On SL I made some good linear progress up until I hit 115 lbs. Part of the problem was that after doing five sets of squats at close to my 5RM, I was pretty sapped. In one workout I was able to perform five sets of five at 115. The next time around after the squats nearly did me in, I could barely get three reps. The next week, I pulled some plates off and went to a lower weight. That's obviously not what anyone wants to do. Those offering advice suggested maybe I wasn't eating enough to maintain my energy level. Bull. I know I'm eating enough because I've actually gained weight over the last couple of months. The fact is, I'm heavier now than I ever have been in my entire life. And I'm consuming plenty of protein, so that couldn't be it.
Yesterday, I was able to do 10 reps at 105 in my last and heaviest set. Wendler doesn't advocate working to failure on sets, but he does say on the last set to do as many as you can. Ten reps at 105 was pretty easy, to tell you the truth. If I've erred in any way following 5/3/1 it's that I underestimated my 1RMs on everything. And that's fine. Wendler even recommends low-balling it at first.
If you take a little visit to the Fitocracy forums for the SL group, you'll find a common theme. At least one day a week someone will complain that they're having trouble with the OHP. The idea of switching from the SL plan, however, is never considered. It's always "eat more" or do this exercise or that exercise.
I'm also seeing an improvement in the deadlift. I'll be finishing up today at 295 for as many reps as I can do. Based on last week, I'm guessing I can do at least three. I'm going to try for five.
It's up to every individual to experiment and find out what works best for them. Strict adherence to a cookie-cutter program is likely to stymie anyone who isn't willing to consider alternatives.
Sunday, May 6, 2012
Starting to complicate things
In my determination to give the 20-rep squat a fair chance, I stuck to that plan on Saturday, performing two sets of 20 reps at 125 and finishing with a set of 17 at 125. Yes, I probably could have pushed out those last few reps, but my counter/coach (my 14-year-old daughter) didn't know enough to yell at me and call me a wuss when I started to rack the bar at 17.
I followed up the squats with three sets on the vertical leg press at 355 and five sets of 15 x 15 on the standing leg curl.
Not a bad workout, all things considered. What I've learned about the 20-rep squat is this: If you want to do something that will really kick you in the pants, the 20-rep squat is it. I had to call my daughter in to count reps for me because by the time I got to that third set, I was having to pause and take multiple breaths between each rep. Focusing on my breathing and form became so difficult that I just plain couldn't concentrate on counting reps.
Her post-set critique was, "You did really well on those first ten."
I think that's a good motivator.
The only problem is, I feel like I need to do more. I know that I'm going to have to work my way up to doing some serious 20-rep squatting, but one day a week just doesn't feel like enough. I've started doing one 20-rep squat at the end of other workouts and on off days as well. I'd like to be able to do four sets of 20 in the next squat workout this coming Friday. I would be happy if in the next week I could do 20 reps at 135. That would feel like a big step forward for me. If I can add 5-10 lbs. steadily each week, then I'm confident that I can keep doing it and go past 200 lbs. That would be pretty amazing, considering just two weeks ago it was all I could do to get five reps at 215.
In the meantime, I'm getting that itch again to do some off-the-barbell-path exercises. Today I did one set of farmer's walk with 65-lb. dumbbells. My original intent was to do three sets, but then I remembered that I'd originally planned on doing this on Saturday after having done my squat workout on Friday. But I skipped the Friday workout to see The Avengers and made it up on Saturday. I stopped after the one set because I didn't want it to have an impact on Monday's workout. I want to have at least a day of rest before I do a regular workout after doing something like farmer's walk.
And therein lies my current conundrum: How do I continue to follow the Wendler 5/3/1 plan but also work in stuff like farmer's walk and tire flips. Yeah, I want to start doing tire flips too. I just need to start asking around to see if I can find a discarded tractor tire somewhere. I live in semi-rural, suburban area, so tractor tires shouldn't be too hard to find.
One option I'm considering is substituting the strongman movements in place of the current assistance work I'm doing. The drawback to that is that the assistance work is supposed to be lighter, higher-rep sets to supplement the main workout, which employs one of the big four primary barbell movements: overhead press, deadlift, squat, bench press. But farmer's walk and tire flips are pretty taxing. I can't exactly call them "assistance work."
That leads me to lean in the direction of adding a fifth workout day to my schedule on Saturdays. An hour of farmer's walk and tire flips on Saturdays ought to be a pretty challenging workout. And I would have all of Sunday to recuperate. The concern there is that it could interfere with my recovery from the 20-rep squat workout on Friday. I guess I'll just have to eat more and try to get to bed extra early Friday night.
And I'm ready to try some new assistance movements, but I want to go through an entire four-week cycle before I start swapping. I'm still undecided as to what exactly these will be, but I know that bent-over row and shrugs will be two of them. I love Kroc rows, but I don't consider them to be a substitute for bent-over barbell rows. I feel like I could really do without the hanging leg raises. Sure, it's good ab work, but of all the exercises I do, it's the one I think I value the least.
Well, off to see about finding a humongous tire somewhere ...
I followed up the squats with three sets on the vertical leg press at 355 and five sets of 15 x 15 on the standing leg curl.
Not a bad workout, all things considered. What I've learned about the 20-rep squat is this: If you want to do something that will really kick you in the pants, the 20-rep squat is it. I had to call my daughter in to count reps for me because by the time I got to that third set, I was having to pause and take multiple breaths between each rep. Focusing on my breathing and form became so difficult that I just plain couldn't concentrate on counting reps.
Her post-set critique was, "You did really well on those first ten."
I think that's a good motivator.
The only problem is, I feel like I need to do more. I know that I'm going to have to work my way up to doing some serious 20-rep squatting, but one day a week just doesn't feel like enough. I've started doing one 20-rep squat at the end of other workouts and on off days as well. I'd like to be able to do four sets of 20 in the next squat workout this coming Friday. I would be happy if in the next week I could do 20 reps at 135. That would feel like a big step forward for me. If I can add 5-10 lbs. steadily each week, then I'm confident that I can keep doing it and go past 200 lbs. That would be pretty amazing, considering just two weeks ago it was all I could do to get five reps at 215.
In the meantime, I'm getting that itch again to do some off-the-barbell-path exercises. Today I did one set of farmer's walk with 65-lb. dumbbells. My original intent was to do three sets, but then I remembered that I'd originally planned on doing this on Saturday after having done my squat workout on Friday. But I skipped the Friday workout to see The Avengers and made it up on Saturday. I stopped after the one set because I didn't want it to have an impact on Monday's workout. I want to have at least a day of rest before I do a regular workout after doing something like farmer's walk.
And therein lies my current conundrum: How do I continue to follow the Wendler 5/3/1 plan but also work in stuff like farmer's walk and tire flips. Yeah, I want to start doing tire flips too. I just need to start asking around to see if I can find a discarded tractor tire somewhere. I live in semi-rural, suburban area, so tractor tires shouldn't be too hard to find.
One option I'm considering is substituting the strongman movements in place of the current assistance work I'm doing. The drawback to that is that the assistance work is supposed to be lighter, higher-rep sets to supplement the main workout, which employs one of the big four primary barbell movements: overhead press, deadlift, squat, bench press. But farmer's walk and tire flips are pretty taxing. I can't exactly call them "assistance work."
That leads me to lean in the direction of adding a fifth workout day to my schedule on Saturdays. An hour of farmer's walk and tire flips on Saturdays ought to be a pretty challenging workout. And I would have all of Sunday to recuperate. The concern there is that it could interfere with my recovery from the 20-rep squat workout on Friday. I guess I'll just have to eat more and try to get to bed extra early Friday night.
And I'm ready to try some new assistance movements, but I want to go through an entire four-week cycle before I start swapping. I'm still undecided as to what exactly these will be, but I know that bent-over row and shrugs will be two of them. I love Kroc rows, but I don't consider them to be a substitute for bent-over barbell rows. I feel like I could really do without the hanging leg raises. Sure, it's good ab work, but of all the exercises I do, it's the one I think I value the least.
Well, off to see about finding a humongous tire somewhere ...
Friday, May 4, 2012
The grand experiment
One day last week when I was perusing posts on Fitocracy, I stumbled across a question about the 20-rep squat that had elicited a series of responses for many community members, most making the distinction between the kind of work that increases muscle size versus the kind that builds strength. As I am wont to do, I decided to play devil's advocate, and it's led me to my latest weight training experiment.
The question that prompted it was why athletes and weight training enthusiasts don't do the 20-rep squat more often. If it's supposed to be so great, the person asked, why are we doing five sets of five or three sets of five?
Good question. A link was provided to a study that concluded that performing three sets of high-repetitions was more effective at stimulating hypertrophy than performing fewer reps at a higher weight. The research article (will post a link as soon as I can find the original) sparked widespread skepticism across the various factions in the weight training/body building world. Many called the study flawed or pointed out that it drew far too broad conclusions from a very narrow test. All valid concerns, but what about a real-world application of the basic idea it presents?
Most of those responding to the Fitocracy post asserted that the heavier-weight, lower-rep scheme was better for building strength and that strength was the goal of the programs most of the Fitocracy members follow. Mark Rippetoe's Starting Strength, Mehdi's StrongLifts 5x5 and Jim Wendler's 5/3/1--all barbell programs emphasizing compound moments in the low-to-mid rep range--are the most popular. These programs, they argued were more effective for building strength than a high-rep scheme would be. I myself am currently following 5/3/1 with the added twist of the 20-rep-squat experiment. I followed the 5x5 program until I started to hit the wall and decided I needed to try something different.
I decided to play devil's advocate at this point. I can't help myself when it comes to matters like these. In the realm of weight training, far too many people adhere to conventional wisdom as if it's made up of etched-in-stone, immutable laws of nature. In the face of such unwavering devotion to any single idea, I become George Costanza and do the opposite.
It's not that I think the conventional wisdom in this case is wrong; it's that I know from personal experience that nothing works the same for everyone, and no one program can be a simple and complete answer. My best gains in terms of strength and size came when I defied the conventional wisdom and created my own unorthodox progression method. Ultimately, following 5x5, Wendler and whatever else I dig up, will lead to my designing an entirely new program that incorporates bits and pieces from all of them.
One point I tried to make in response to the high-rep naysayers was that they were talking about hypertrophy and strength as if they were mutually exclusive and entirely different ends. Hypertrophy and strength, I argued, go hand in hand. Common sense and a wealth of studies back me up on this. This study, for example, examined the effects of strength training in older men, concluding that "Strength gains in older men were associated with significant muscle hypertrophy and an increase in myofibrillar protein turnover." Though the aim of the study was not to investigate the relationship between strength and hypertrophy, the findings are proof of their integral relationship: strength = hypertrophy.
The question that prompted it was why athletes and weight training enthusiasts don't do the 20-rep squat more often. If it's supposed to be so great, the person asked, why are we doing five sets of five or three sets of five?
Good question. A link was provided to a study that concluded that performing three sets of high-repetitions was more effective at stimulating hypertrophy than performing fewer reps at a higher weight. The research article (will post a link as soon as I can find the original) sparked widespread skepticism across the various factions in the weight training/body building world. Many called the study flawed or pointed out that it drew far too broad conclusions from a very narrow test. All valid concerns, but what about a real-world application of the basic idea it presents?
Most of those responding to the Fitocracy post asserted that the heavier-weight, lower-rep scheme was better for building strength and that strength was the goal of the programs most of the Fitocracy members follow. Mark Rippetoe's Starting Strength, Mehdi's StrongLifts 5x5 and Jim Wendler's 5/3/1--all barbell programs emphasizing compound moments in the low-to-mid rep range--are the most popular. These programs, they argued were more effective for building strength than a high-rep scheme would be. I myself am currently following 5/3/1 with the added twist of the 20-rep-squat experiment. I followed the 5x5 program until I started to hit the wall and decided I needed to try something different.
I decided to play devil's advocate at this point. I can't help myself when it comes to matters like these. In the realm of weight training, far too many people adhere to conventional wisdom as if it's made up of etched-in-stone, immutable laws of nature. In the face of such unwavering devotion to any single idea, I become George Costanza and do the opposite.
It's not that I think the conventional wisdom in this case is wrong; it's that I know from personal experience that nothing works the same for everyone, and no one program can be a simple and complete answer. My best gains in terms of strength and size came when I defied the conventional wisdom and created my own unorthodox progression method. Ultimately, following 5x5, Wendler and whatever else I dig up, will lead to my designing an entirely new program that incorporates bits and pieces from all of them.
One point I tried to make in response to the high-rep naysayers was that they were talking about hypertrophy and strength as if they were mutually exclusive and entirely different ends. Hypertrophy and strength, I argued, go hand in hand. Common sense and a wealth of studies back me up on this. This study, for example, examined the effects of strength training in older men, concluding that "Strength gains in older men were associated with significant muscle hypertrophy and an increase in myofibrillar protein turnover." Though the aim of the study was not to investigate the relationship between strength and hypertrophy, the findings are proof of their integral relationship: strength = hypertrophy.
The position I attempted to defend was that if, as the other study had concluded, performing a 20-rep squat at a lower weight more effectively stimulates hypertrophy, then it is by definition as an effective method to build strength.
I qualify this position by acknowledging that the biggest muscles are not the strongest muscles, that bodybuilders are not necessarily great powerlifters. But certainly a person who has exercised and who has bigger muscles is stronger than the average person. Anecdotally, I attended college with a guy who was headed to the Marines for officer training. He didn't lift weights. Didn't even believe in it. He did push-ups, dips, pull-ups, lunges, bodyweight squats, etc. He was very big muscularly and he was also very strong.
If we adhered to the hard and fast rules of the lower-rep, higher weight ideas, this guy shouldn't have been that strong.
The whole discussion on Fitocracy resulted in my making the decision to be my own guinea pig (as usual). I'm experimenting with the 20-rep squat just to see how following a higher-rep scheme will affect my strength and hypertrophy gains. The fact is, I have skinny legs. I am a small-boned person with a petite, girlish frame. Yes, I sound dainty, but I have over the years packed on some muscle.
So the plan is this: I work out 4 days a week following Wendler's Triumverate plan. Fridays are squat days. Instead of performing the squats as prescribed by Wendler, I'm going to do 3-4 high-rep squats. The first set will be 20 reps at the highest weight at which I can perform 20 reps. I'm doing everything else strictly according to the Wendler 5/3/1 plan.
What will happen? I'm not really sure. But here's how I've thought it through: A few weeks back I did a 20-rep squat at 95 pounds, and it was tough to get those last few reps. The other day I did 20 reps at 115. If I can add 5-10 pounds per week to my 20-rep squat, obviously, I'm getting stronger. How is that any different from another plan where I add 5-10 pounds per week but only perform 5 reps across 5 sets? If two weeks from now I'm performing 20 reps at 145, that's a pretty big improvement over 20 reps at 95. Consider this: If I keep going and all I ever do are 20-rep squats, wouldn't it be better, assuming it can be achieved, to be doing 20 reps a 200+ pounds than doing 5? Based on calculations, my current 1RM on the squat is somewhere in the mid 200s.
One person countered my argument with the idea that I won't have any way to actually compare doing a 20-rep scheme to a lower-rep, higher-weight scheme because I can't do both at once to measure one against the other. True enough. The only thing I have to go on right now is how much I'd been squatting on the SL 5x5 plan. I was starting to push the 5-rep envelope pretty hard at 215. My all-time max on the squat was 310 several years ago. What I know for sure in dropping the weight is that I'll be able to perform the squat with perfect form through a full range of motion. If I can continue to add weight and maintain the form, then by the time I get into the upper 100 range for 20 reps, I'm convinced I will be better off than being able to do 5 reps at 215.
My dream, of course, is being able to do 300 lbs. for 20 reps. Now that would be something.
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
Barefoot shoes: A rant
I love my Vibram FiveFingers KSOs. They're lightweight, comfortable, versatile. At the beach on vacation for a week, I wore nothing but my KSOs, in and out of the water. I'm convinced they are the perfect footwear for the beach.
I liked them so much, I recently bought a pair of Komodosports, which I'm wearing right now. I could easily see myself wearing nothing but Vibrams for the rest of my life. I mean in terms of footwear, of course.
But I've got one tiny little problem with these and other "barefoot" shoes: I can't help wondering why they're so doggoned expensive. When I first started shopping for a pair of Vibrams, most models were priced at $100 and up. I finally snagged my KSOs online at a discounted price. The Komodosports go for $99.95 online, the LS model $109.95. I bought a pair when I found a coupon that resulted in a $20 discount.
My question is this: Why is it that "minimalist" shoes cost more than traditional shoes? I can understand an argument along the lines of supply and demand, but when you look at the shoes themselves, you'd think they would cost less, not more. Sure, you can find traditional running shoes and athletic shoes that cost a lot more, but I can also walk into any shoe store and find a decent pair of athletic shoes for nearly half what I paid for my Vibrams.
The fact is, in terms of their physical composition, there's not much to a pair of barefoot/minimalist shoes. It's a thin slab of rubber glued to some fabric, sometimes with a velcro strap or two. As much as I like the two pair of Vibrams I own, I also can't help feeling guilty about purchasing them because, frankly, I have to seriously wonder if they're really worth what I've paid.
Don't get me wrong: Like I said, I love these shoes. But I feel kind of the same about making this kind of purchase as I do spending $60 on a video game. It makes me happy, but is it a worthwhile use of my hard-earned money?
Vibram FiveFingers has been something of a pioneer in this style of shoe, but many other competitors are now jumping in, including Fila with its Skeletoes and Adidas with adiPure. I can only hope the competition is good for buyers like me because I want more of them, but I simply cannot justify the expense expect maybe as a once-in-a-while splurge.
Someday I'd like to have a whole closet full of Vibrams, but, alas, I haven't achieved an Imelda Marcos level of success just yet.
State of the regimen--workout regimen, that is
Back in late 2011 I lost it--my motivation to work out, my desire to do anything other than press buttons on a remote. There was no specific reason for it; it just happened.
In January I happened to catch a couple of women's CrossFit competitions (one of the benefits of being a TV Remote Commander), and I was dumbstruck by what these women could do. Their power, strength and endurance were just plain mind boggling. And the thought that hit me was, I need to get back in shape.
Toward that end, I picked up on the SL 5x5 plan. It was simple, involved nothing but barbell work and focused on the big movements that I'd already discovered were the key to get stronger. I followed the plan for about 2 1/2 months. During this time, I also studied other plans, including Mark Rippetoe's Starting Strength and Jim Wendler's 5/3/1.
The 5x5 plan worked well, but by the time I'd reached the end of that 2.5-month period, I found I was plateauing on some lifts, especially the overhead press (OHP). When you post questions about this in the various forums (I currently log my workouts on Fitocracy), you get all kinds of responses about eating more and doing this exercise or that exercise to strengthen the deltoids or triceps or whatever. But I knew it was time for a change-up.
So I've since switched to Wendler's 5/3/1. I'm in week 2 of the plan, and I already like it and am seeing improvements. One of the aspects of the plan I like best is the assistance work. I opted for the Triumverate version because I finish off each workout with 5 sets of two different assistance exercises. I believe for some lifts 5 sets of 5 is just too much. When you begin to push that 5RM, it becomes harder and harder to make real progress.
On the OHP, for example, I did 5x5 at 115 lbs. three weeks before I made the switch. In the next workout, I could barely do 3 reps at the same weight. I managed one set of 5 a few sets of 3 and one set of 4 reps. Why? Why such a huge backward slide after I was making such good progress? One reason was because the squat was taking a lot out of me. As you increase the poundages and those 5 reps become more of a challenge, you get spent a lot more quickly on the squat. Everything after that is an uphill battle. The other reason is simply that the progression is too aggressive for a lift like the OHP. Sure, Mehdi suggests making smaller, incremental increases in such cases to give your body more time to adapt, but taken with the other heavy movements, it's just not as easy as it sounds.
The basic idea of SL 5x5 is sound, and anybody can find success on it. But what happens when you hit the wall? The bottom line for me is this: Everything works--for a while. When it stops working, why would you keep doing the same thing over and over expecting it to change? It won't.
So I bid a farewell to SL 5x5--at least for now.
In January I happened to catch a couple of women's CrossFit competitions (one of the benefits of being a TV Remote Commander), and I was dumbstruck by what these women could do. Their power, strength and endurance were just plain mind boggling. And the thought that hit me was, I need to get back in shape.
Toward that end, I picked up on the SL 5x5 plan. It was simple, involved nothing but barbell work and focused on the big movements that I'd already discovered were the key to get stronger. I followed the plan for about 2 1/2 months. During this time, I also studied other plans, including Mark Rippetoe's Starting Strength and Jim Wendler's 5/3/1.
The 5x5 plan worked well, but by the time I'd reached the end of that 2.5-month period, I found I was plateauing on some lifts, especially the overhead press (OHP). When you post questions about this in the various forums (I currently log my workouts on Fitocracy), you get all kinds of responses about eating more and doing this exercise or that exercise to strengthen the deltoids or triceps or whatever. But I knew it was time for a change-up.
So I've since switched to Wendler's 5/3/1. I'm in week 2 of the plan, and I already like it and am seeing improvements. One of the aspects of the plan I like best is the assistance work. I opted for the Triumverate version because I finish off each workout with 5 sets of two different assistance exercises. I believe for some lifts 5 sets of 5 is just too much. When you begin to push that 5RM, it becomes harder and harder to make real progress.
On the OHP, for example, I did 5x5 at 115 lbs. three weeks before I made the switch. In the next workout, I could barely do 3 reps at the same weight. I managed one set of 5 a few sets of 3 and one set of 4 reps. Why? Why such a huge backward slide after I was making such good progress? One reason was because the squat was taking a lot out of me. As you increase the poundages and those 5 reps become more of a challenge, you get spent a lot more quickly on the squat. Everything after that is an uphill battle. The other reason is simply that the progression is too aggressive for a lift like the OHP. Sure, Mehdi suggests making smaller, incremental increases in such cases to give your body more time to adapt, but taken with the other heavy movements, it's just not as easy as it sounds.
The basic idea of SL 5x5 is sound, and anybody can find success on it. But what happens when you hit the wall? The bottom line for me is this: Everything works--for a while. When it stops working, why would you keep doing the same thing over and over expecting it to change? It won't.
So I bid a farewell to SL 5x5--at least for now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)