What training are you doing/have you done today? (Vol.3)
Discussion
ORD said:
Animal said:
Cheers!
As a comparison, Stan Efferding is 6ft and weighed in at 125kg, and he's enormous. I'd be perfectly happy with being able to maintain my strength levels at a lower bodyweight, and 80kg is my aim.
I doubt that will be possible, to be blunt. Without pharmaceutical help, weight loss will involve some loss of strength. As a comparison, Stan Efferding is 6ft and weighed in at 125kg, and he's enormous. I'd be perfectly happy with being able to maintain my strength levels at a lower bodyweight, and 80kg is my aim.
ORD said:
Question about my crappy first set on bench press today (only got 4 reps). The 4th rep was slow, and I tried damn hard to grind out the 5th rep but just couldn't. By contrast, the 2nd set was easy - I could maybe have got 6 reps. And even the 3rd set was OK - the 5th rep was slow but never in doubt.
Does anyone else get this - the first heavy set is crazy hard? I get it all the time on bench, but never squat or even OHP. Perhaps I should go for a heavy single as my last warm up set (above the working weight), just to get my CNS to wake the fk up!
I don’t at the minute as I’m doing a 5/3/1 program but the odd time I’ll do the same weight on all my working sets, the first set I find the most difficult mentally as I don’t know how heavy the weight will feel so it always tends to shock me a little, the second and third set feels better as I know how heavy the weight feels so feel mentally and physically ready for it.Does anyone else get this - the first heavy set is crazy hard? I get it all the time on bench, but never squat or even OHP. Perhaps I should go for a heavy single as my last warm up set (above the working weight), just to get my CNS to wake the fk up!
Edit: Any experienced powerlifters around the East Midlands? Was wanting to get a session in with someone that knows how to bench, deadlift, squat, ohp with proper form? Building my strength back up to where it was before all the long distance running so wanted to check form, despite me doing the power lifting routine since December.
Edited by Regiment on Tuesday 19th June 15:13
I think that guy is mostly full of crap. Volume is strongly correlated with strength and muscle gains, but only all else being equal. I stopped listening once he said that doing 4 sets of 5 pull ups spaced over 4 days would be better than one maximal set of 10. That’s patent rubbish. It would do nothing for someone with a max set of 10 (although I think the position might be different for weaker or much much stronger people).
There are dozens and dozens of studies showing that intensiveness is key - getting at least fairly close to failure - at least with low loads. I think the position might be different once intensity is very high - staying a long way from failure might work fine as long as the stress is still very high relative to maximum output (e.g. sprinting at 20 second pace for 10 seconds may make you faster; lifting 85% of 1RM for 5 sets of 3 may make you stronger, etc ).
The other thing about an ‘easy works’ approach is that is simply does not reflect the reality on the ground. The country is full of people who don’t try very hard at exercise - runners who basically jog, lifters who lift 50% of true 1RM for 5 sets of 5, etc. And they don’t get better. By contrast, elite athletes try damn hard and get amazing results.
We can even see it on this thread: the strong guys lift hard as hell and the fit guys work insanely hard. None of them does a gentle workout every day and makes easy gains. The most successful novice lifting programme has you do basically 3 sets of 5 using approximately your 5RM every workout. Brutal.
There are dozens and dozens of studies showing that intensiveness is key - getting at least fairly close to failure - at least with low loads. I think the position might be different once intensity is very high - staying a long way from failure might work fine as long as the stress is still very high relative to maximum output (e.g. sprinting at 20 second pace for 10 seconds may make you faster; lifting 85% of 1RM for 5 sets of 3 may make you stronger, etc ).
The other thing about an ‘easy works’ approach is that is simply does not reflect the reality on the ground. The country is full of people who don’t try very hard at exercise - runners who basically jog, lifters who lift 50% of true 1RM for 5 sets of 5, etc. And they don’t get better. By contrast, elite athletes try damn hard and get amazing results.
We can even see it on this thread: the strong guys lift hard as hell and the fit guys work insanely hard. None of them does a gentle workout every day and makes easy gains. The most successful novice lifting programme has you do basically 3 sets of 5 using approximately your 5RM every workout. Brutal.
Halb said:
=Joe Rogan - How To Workout Smarter=
https://youtu.be/RDR0drfUKqc
Says the guy who looks like he’s never lifted any weights. I listen. I conclude.... horest https://youtu.be/RDR0drfUKqc
ORD said:
He makes no distinction between skill acquisition and forcing physiological change. Sure, easy and often works for skill acquisition. But applying that to strength or fitness is a massive leap (and requires complete ignorance of the science).
It’s why I see the same people in the gym year round who look exactly the same. Barely toned. They never put any effort in and stop when it gets a bit hard. Rightly or wrongly unless I have some soreness the day following I feel like I didn’t have enough intensity. I realise that is not strictly correct but using 5kg weights isn’t going to do jackAdvocatus diaboli.
I’d say the “easy and often” thing would work; it just depends on what your abilities are, and what you want to achieve out of it. Context is key, I reckon.
Context can either make it viable or it make it complete and utter codswollop, but ultimately, without an individual context, I don’t think it’s fair to write it off.
I’d say the “easy and often” thing would work; it just depends on what your abilities are, and what you want to achieve out of it. Context is key, I reckon.
Context can either make it viable or it make it complete and utter codswollop, but ultimately, without an individual context, I don’t think it’s fair to write it off.
TheJimi said:
Advocatus diaboli.
I’d say the “easy and often” thing would work; it just depends on what your abilities are, and what you want to achieve out of it. Context is key, I reckon.
Context can either make it viable or it make it complete and utter codswollop, but ultimately, without an individual context, I don’t think it’s fair to write it off.
Each to their own but i consider it as useful as studying for exams whilst watching tv. You’re correct in that it does depend on what you want to achieve. If it’s fk all then I say fill your boots I’d say the “easy and often” thing would work; it just depends on what your abilities are, and what you want to achieve out of it. Context is key, I reckon.
Context can either make it viable or it make it complete and utter codswollop, but ultimately, without an individual context, I don’t think it’s fair to write it off.
Gassing Station | Health Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff