Concurrent Strength Training & Running 2015: Eight-Week Workout Cycle II

Yah, I think Rip (who didn't take the press seriously for the first 15 years of his career) also says one of the reasons for doing the bench is to strengthen the press, because he doesn't think the bench press is all that useful as an athletic support. I dunno which carries over to which better, my experience is too limited. Same with the squat to/from deadlift directionality. I think the press does bulletproof one's bench press more than the other way around (my left shoulder keeps feeling better and better), and the squat seems to bulletproof the deadlift too (my right glute/hip feels completely healed). I'm not sure if either of the former lifts actually makes the corresponding latter lift stronger though. I also prefer the press over the bench press because it seems to better serve my primary ST goal of having a strong back, especially now that I'm able to do heavier weights. It was cool many years ago when I could do my first body weight bench press, but I think when I'm able to do a bodyweight press it will be a much better measure of overall strength.

Interesting that rip says that, as I find benching to have great carryover to mountain bilking. It's over kill for the road stuff though. There is also a great back stimulus if you use the power lifting style, good for your posture.
I should probably work in some grip work to as that is another one that would have good carryover to MTB, maybe even longer carries with lighter weights?
Yeah the press is much better from the running perspective and having strong core stabilization capabilities, I still think maybe some heavy overhead carries might be very beneficial as well.

That's a nice organization. I'm pretty much in line with your thinking, although I'm not doing splits because I'm not running and biking like you. I guess at some point you have to chose whether or not the st is supporting the racing or if it exists independently and is only accommodating your running and biking training by going to a split.

For me, the two--st and running--exist independently, with no necessary carryover, although being stronger should, of course, help my running, and having a good aerobic base should help my lifting, pace all the meatheads who enjoy indulging their distaste for any sort of endurance activity. At least Wendler understands the importance of some cardio.

So for me, as for exercise selection, it's just a question of how much to worry about those categories of lift that exist outside of the six basic force/direction pairings of the slow lifts, like "rotational," "anterior chain," "plyometric/explosive," and "loaded carry." Right now my weekly wave workouts are taking me to the brink, but it would be nice to get in a minimum of two assistance exercises at the end of each workout. I put the most likely candidates in boldface in this week's workout template. Wendler is a big believer in back extensions, but I think pikes are pretty much the same thing and a little more fullbody/athletic.

Yeah for the most part I'd agree that the running and lifting do exist independently, at least for what I am hoping to gain out of lifting and running. I think I should probably look at the lifts from a lifting goal perspective and then decide if there is too much interference with running. Like the straight set 5 rep deadlifts, they were just neutral from a lifting perspective compared to lower rep sets and definitely a negative from the running perspective.

One lift in particular I keep thinking about is weighted step ups, as this one might be a really good carryover lift and have some benefit for the squat.

http://www.biggerfasterstronger.com/uploads2/91_Spring_StepUps.pdf
https://www.t-nation.com/training/step-up-for-muscular-development
http://straighttothebar.com/articles/2006/09/the_stepup_a_real_squat_altern/
http://www.backcountry.com/explore/...ntain-athlete-training-center-with-kim-havell


I guess one principle I try to follow for time-saving is to put the assistance exercises that use the same piece of equipment together, if it doesn't interfere too much with another logic, so landmine twists could go in the workout that has the landmine press. I'm also leaning towards 1x8-10 instead of 2x5 for assistance.

I'm still wavering on power cleans. Probably won't get to them until my deadlift is back over 300. Same with the dips, probably best to leave them off until my focus lifts improve a lot more. I mean, after I get my squat and press aligned with the Iron Ratio, I'll still have my pullups to worry about, so all that other stuff can wait. There simply isn't enough time or energy to add in anything that isn't light assistance right now, unless I start subbing them in for one of the main lifts on my Stamina Day.

Yeah good point about pairing the lifts, its why I chose to do CGBP with the bench and push press with the press. Landmine twists and presses, step ups and now I am back into exercise selection confusion!
It's too bad you can't do a push press because I think I prefer them over the power cleans. PC's are more of a fluff lift if you ask me, and they have a higher potential for injury. I might even consider dump them for step ups?

Sigh...
 
Interesting that rip says that, as I find benching to have great carryover to mountain bilking. It's over kill for the road stuff though. There is also a great back stimulus if you use the power lifting style, good for your posture.

Here's the Rip reference:

Tried the powerlifting leg drive again yesterday. I likes it! The only question now is how much arch to allow in my back. It's interesting you've noted that the powerlifting style is good for one's posture. I guess the bridging movement is supposed to be real good for spinal health in general. Supposedly the powerlifting style is also good for the shoulders. It's so great these days having a healthier left shoulder, I guess it can't hurt to encourage good shoulder health even further with a better bench press technique.
I should probably work in some grip work to as that is another one that would have good carryover to MTB, maybe even longer carries with lighter weights?
Yeah the press is much better from the running perspective and having strong core stabilization capabilities, I still think maybe some heavy overhead carries might be very beneficial as well.
Yah, overhead carries, or the "Waiter's Walk" would be good to mix up with the Farmer's Walk. I also like Overhead Squats a lot for stabilization work, but with my current focus on getting my squat load up, I don't have the time or inclination.

Yeah for the most part I'd agree that the running and lifting do exist independently, at least for what I am hoping to gain out of lifting and running. I think I should probably look at the lifts from a lifting goal perspective and then decide if there is too much interference with running. Like the straight set 5 rep deadlifts, they were just neutral from a lifting perspective compared to lower rep sets and definitely a negative from the running perspective.
Excellent way to put it.

Yah, I think they would be a better and/or more natural single leg exercise than lunges. I think according to RDL Fitness they have less shearing force than lunges too, but I might be misremembering that.

I've included step-ups in my chart as one of my plyometric exercises, along with box jumps and bench hops. They're only plyometric if they're done unweighted and fast of course. Weighted might be more fun, since I'm already running and planning on getting serious about hills as soon as I can, so more explosive step-ups might be a little redundant.
Yeah good point about pairing the lifts, its why I chose to do CGBP with the bench and push press with the press. Landmine twists and presses, step ups and now I am back into exercise selection confusion!
It's too bad you can't do a push press because I think I prefer them over the power cleans. PC's are more of a fluff lift if you ask me, and they have a higher potential for injury. I might even consider dump them for step ups?

Sigh...
Interesting to get more feedback from you about Power Lifts. I have this nagging sense of obligation to do them because Starr and Rippetoe think so highly of them. I think Wendler likes them too. But then again, I'm not a young guy training for football, so how useful are they? Are they useful or unique enough to spend time learning how to do them properly? I dunno. I guess if I had a higher garage ceiling I might be motivated to learn how to clean and press, maybe work in the push press too as you suggest. And I like the idea of learning how to do more explosive lifts, but it seems like it's best just to keep pushing strength gains for another year or two until I start to plateau, then reassess.

Really, everything is going really well these days so gotta drop the obsessiveness a bit and be content with what I got going. What's missing now is the running. I've been trying to massage the mild TOFP I picked up the last few times out. It feels OK today so I'll try a few higher-paced intervals interspersed with lots of walking. Now that it's warm enough to walk barefoot no problem, I don't mind the walking so much--at least I'm getting in some barefooting, building the calluses back up. I might start trying the loaded vest thing again too on my walk-commutes, but probably at lighter weight so it doesn't dig into my shoulders so much. Maybe 30-40 pounds instead of 60.

In your case, it's different, because with a split routine you almost have to incorporate some variations or assistance on the upper body days in order to get a complete workout, right? Although, I don't know, if you did all four basic upper body exercises for volume, that'd be a pretty full workout.
 
squats: 1x6 at 75lbs, 5x6 at 115lbs
Squat watch: hey, your squats are coming along nicely--fast progress! How does the movement feel? Has the technique become fairly automatic?
I tried to replicate last week but it was a fail. My legs felt tired and never did get really warmed up. So instead I pushed the squats weight to 100kgs which felt ok, tough but not impossible. Next week I am going to take a light week in prep for my 55k which has some decent elevation change. These higher weight workouts are also beginning to take significantly longer, maybe I need to lower the jumps to 5kgs vs. 10kgs.
We talked a little about this before, but I'm becoming more and more convinced that it's important to progress in small increments. For me, that's five pounds or 2.5 kgs max. Even if it just postpones a 10-pound jump by a week, I think it's beneficial to get in a week at just five pounds heavier. I almost went for a ten-pound jump in my squat this week, because I'm probably ready, but I'm glad I just went for a five-pounder, because success is pretty much assured, I don't have any anxiety before getting under the bar, and I can better monitor any technical breakdowns. A lot of guys, including Rippetoe and Wendler I think, recommend very small increases. I think I'm more or less training at 90% instinctively now.
 
We talked a little about this before, but I'm becoming more and more convinced that it's important to progress in small increments. For me, that's five pounds or 2.5 kgs max. Even if it just postpones a 10-pound jump by a week, I think it's beneficial to get in a week at just five pounds heavier. I almost went for a ten-pound jump in my squat this week, because I'm probably ready, but I'm glad I just went for a five-pounder, because success is pretty much assured, I don't have any anxiety before getting under the bar, and I can better monitor any technical breakdowns. A lot of guys, including Rippetoe and Wendler I think, recommend very small increases. I think I'm more or less training at 90% instinctively now.

Yep I am going to go back to this too. Maybe do 5lb increases for the uppers and 10lb increases for the lowers or 2.5/5kgs? And just slow the progress down. I'm not in any rush. I didn't even try the last rep on the sets as I knew my form was going to breakdown too much. I haven't been sleeping well the last couple of nights cause of sick kids. Its amazing how much sleep can affect lifting.

I was thinking about your wave cycling and I kind of like that idea. Maybe for the DL go through this 4 week cycle, Wk 5: 130/135/140 - Wk 6: 135/140/145 - Wk 7: 140/145/150 - Wk 8: 145/150/155 - Wk 1: 135/140/145 - Wk 2: 140/145/150 - Wk 3: 145/150/155 - Wk 4: 150/155/160.

That seems like it might be a tough week 4 though. 4 x 150? Maybe I could jump 2.5 kgs between the 4 weeks?

edit: BTW I was thinking about you doing kneeling presses. It seems like that would make it tougher than a standing press? I can't imagine it feels good on your knees?
 
Squat watch: hey, your squats are coming along nicely--fast progress! How does the movement feel? Has the technique become fairly automatic?

the squats are making some progress. my previous high for a working set was way back in december when i would do like 3x5 at 110lbs and then 1x5 at 115lbs or something. so 5x6 at 115lbs is definitely an improvement. and they feel much more solid than back then: obviously i was more skittish at that time about doing the full motion at that load but yesterday, i had to resist the urge to try 120 for the last set. i think the movement seems fairly automatic (could i be at all more equivocating?).

i have a few observations:
* apparently, i must have really weak legs or something (which is weird, as discussed previously)
* at this point in my "career", sets 4 and 5 seem easier than 1 and 2. it is almost like they get monotonically easier. maybe i need to be doing 10 sets of 7 or something and by the ninth set, the bar would just float up on its own before i even get under it. :)
* i have experienced no interference with between squats and running. indeed, it is just the opposite. some of my most solid squatting sessions have come in the evening after a 10-13 mile run in the afternoon. and some of my fastest runs have come the day after doing (what are for me) a heavy squatting session. is it general weakness? low load? mildly high volume? genetically determined body plan? dunno. so, while intuitively you guys' descriptions of having to plan your squats and running like chess moves makes sense in my mind, my personal bodily experience has been completely otherwise. thus, i am wondering what the fundamental differences are or whether there is some way for y'all to modify your approach to have an experience more like mine which might result in happier exercisers and/or better "performance".
 
Yep I am going to go back to this too. Maybe do 5lb increases for the uppers and 10lb increases for the lowers or 2.5/5kgs? And just slow the progress down. I'm not in any rush. I didn't even try the last rep on the sets as I knew my form was going to breakdown too much. I haven't been sleeping well the last couple of nights cause of sick kids. Its amazing how much sleep can affect lifting.

I was thinking about your wave cycling and I kind of like that idea. Maybe for the DL go through this 4 week cycle, Wk 5: 130/135/140 - Wk 6: 135/140/145 - Wk 7: 140/145/150 - Wk 8: 145/150/155 - Wk 1: 135/140/145 - Wk 2: 140/145/150 - Wk 3: 145/150/155 - Wk 4: 150/155/160.

That seems like it might be a tough week 4 though. 4 x 150? Maybe I could jump 2.5 kgs between the 4 weeks?

edit: BTW I was thinking about you doing kneeling presses. It seems like that would make it tougher than a standing press? I can't imagine it feels good on your knees?
Yah, if I had made sure to increase more gradually last year, I may not have run into the injury or strain issues, and so might've been further along than I am now. It's hard to say, but it's definitely better to be safe than sorry. If we think in terms of years and not weeks or months, then slow increases really add up.

I've never thought about that sort of wave. Didn't you try something like that before? Would the load increases be done at a steady set/rep-count? Or would you decrease sets/reps as the load increases? I'm not convinced about the benefit of training below 90% effort-level. I mean that in distinction from 90% 1RM. So, for example, I can do 3x3 @ 90%1RM, which would also be about 90% effort level, since I can do three sets fairly comfortably without risk of missing a rep or technical breakdown. Likewise, if I do 3 x 10 @ 70%1RM, it is still about 90% effort level, for the same reasons. Basically, I'm always doing training maxes, which I would define as challenging yet sustainable work loads, and ones I can recover from in 48 hours.

Now with the scheme you laid out, if you're keeping the reps and sets constant, then you're starting out at a considerably lower effort level, building intensity until you're close to 100%. I think this is more of an advanced level training protocol. I think Rippetoe and a few others have said that at the intermediate level, a cycle or wave needn't be more than a week. For a novice of course, a cycle is one workout.

On the other hand, you're training pretty hard in your cycling and running, which isn't accounted for in Rippetoe's prescriptions, so perhaps a more advanced training cycle would be beneficial, I dunno. Something to consider though.

I guess my wave concept is mostly a 'cover all the bases' routine. Like in running, once I found out there were basically three kinds of pace--anaerobic, tempo, and aerobic--it occurred to me, from a general fitness perspective, and as someone who generally runs just three times a week, that it would probably be best to do all three kinds of run each week, to train all three energy systems, stress the heart in different ways, and have three different ROMs as well.

So after reading up on set and rep parameters in strength training, I found out there are also basically three different rep-ranges, each of which provokes a slightly different stress and adaption. There also appear to be three basic set/rep parameters--volume, density, intensity. So, again, from a general fitness perspective and as someone who lifts three times a week, it seemed like it might be a good idea to train all three different rep ranges and parameters each week. After just a few weeks, it seems like a good way to go, but it's too early to tell for sure. I do think it makes it easier to recover, and may also be a good way to build strength over the long run, while limiting the risk of overtraining. I find it also keeps me mentally fresh because each set/rep protocol presents a different sort of challenge.

Yah, I would think standing would be easier than kneeling. On Monday I started kneeling on a yoga mat, doubled over, because I've been having strange, minor pains around my knees, probably unrelated, but this felt a lot more comfortable. Otherwise, I think it only took me one or two sessions to adapt to the new way of doing overhead presses, and I think it's easier to do them kneeling than seated unsupported. It draws in my lower back more I think, and probably puts less pressure on my spine since I can utilize a little bit of the lower body shock absorption. Really looking forward to a (lean) BW press sometime in the future.

I'm also really keyed about using a modified powerlifter bench press with leg drive. I spent some time looking into it, and I think it might be the way to do. I guess any technique that allows the whole body to become as tight as possible is probably the way to go. Like seated versus standing OH Press; with the former, half the body is soft, it's hard to generate maximal force, and it probably makes one more injury-prone too. It's easiest to get tight on the squat and deadlift, of course, but I'm starting to learn how to attain that on all the other lifts.

Ran hills yesterday, today the toe is OK. I think I may just do that for the rest of this cycle and see where I end up, on the top or on the bottom.
 
the squats are making some progress. my previous high for a working set was way back in december when i would do like 3x5 at 110lbs and then 1x5 at 115lbs or something. so 5x6 at 115lbs is definitely an improvement. and they feel much more solid than back then: obviously i was more skittish at that time about doing the full motion at that load but yesterday, i had to resist the urge to try 120 for the last set. i think the movement seems fairly automatic (could i be at all more equivocating?).

i have a few observations:
* apparently, i must have really weak legs or something (which is weird, as discussed previously)
* at this point in my "career", sets 4 and 5 seem easier than 1 and 2. it is almost like they get monotonically easier. maybe i need to be doing 10 sets of 7 or something and by the ninth set, the bar would just float up on its own before i even get under it. :)
* i have experienced no interference with between squats and running. indeed, it is just the opposite. some of my most solid squatting sessions have come in the evening after a 10-13 mile run in the afternoon. and some of my fastest runs have come the day after doing (what are for me) a heavy squatting session. is it general weakness? low load? mildly high volume? genetically determined body plan? dunno. so, while intuitively you guys' descriptions of having to plan your squats and running like chess moves makes sense in my mind, my personal bodily experience has been completely otherwise. thus, i am wondering what the fundamental differences are or whether there is some way for y'all to modify your approach to have an experience more like mine which might result in happier exercisers and/or better "performance".
You could have strong legs but a relatively weak torso or 'core.' The squat really works the top of the body too. In any case, great to see you're feeling the movement more automatic too. I guess for both of us, the reset was useful.

Well, in your log your first worksets seem to count a little bit like warm-up, right? They're done at lower weights so it makes sense that you get stronger as you warm-up/activate the muscles. I don't keep track of them, but I always do 4-5 warm-up sets before my squat worksets, starting with the bar, then 85lbs, then 125, then 175 if I'm doing 3-5 reps, then my worksets. Even then, it's often on the second workset that I feel best, which seems similar to your experience.

I can't speak for Abide, but our running abilities are so different (you're really good, I suck) that I don't know if it makes sense to compare, but it is interesting that you don't experience any interference from squats. I'm not really concerned with running performance, however, so it doesn't really matter, and I don't really make any special allowance for them. I used to try, but I'm not racing like Abide. Plus I haven't run much during these last 6-9 months of getting my squat up, so it's hard to say what it will be like in a few months if and when my running comes together again. And even when it comes together, I won't be running anything like you are now. Plus, my st goals are more important to me this year, so I'll mostly be focused on getting that squat up to 1.5xBW. Of course, it would be nice to do a 5K in 24 minutes, or a half marathon in two hours, but those may have to be longer term goals, we'll see.
 
It's too bad you can't do a push press because I think I prefer them over the power cleans.
OK, the bench press obsessing continues.
In this video CT says the bench press leg drive should be similar to the push press leg drive. Which makes sense. The kinetic chain is the same, even if one is done horizontal and the other vertical. CT is also suggesting a modified powerlifting style which is close to the way I've been trying to do them. I'm not sure about his idea to shrug the shoulders though. In general, I wish he would've had a little more time and/or money to produce these instructional videos. They feel a little too rushed and improvised, and his minion doesn't always seem to know how to do what he's telling him to do.

I find this stuff interesting not just for improving my technique, but also the implication that virtually any compound lift is in fact a full-body lift. And the idea of a whole-body kinetic chain, and learning how to transfer force through it, would have application in an athletic activity like running or cycling, like you were saying for the bench press and mountain biking. I've already trained this way when practicing karate, learning how to generate a forceful strike with my knees and hips, but I never thought of weight-training in this way.
 
ahh that's irritating I just wrote a post and it disappeared...

Anyway glad to see you are looking more into bench press form. I like CT's method but you should note he is probably the only one I have ever seen to recommend shrugging. It's really not a common cue. So skip it and focus on just squeezing the shoulder blades together if that works better.

I would have to disagree about calling the 4 big lifts full body lifts. If you really breakdown the lifts the non-dominant muscles are only supporting via isometric contraction and really don't have any eccentric or concentric contraction. Hence I wouldn't agree that the bench is at all similar to the push press? He actually says quite a few funny things in this video, I'm pretty sure geared PL's hold the bar pretty wide not in close? Anyway the only lifts that I think could legitimately be called a full body lift is probably the C&J. Where virtually every muscle group would be going through a full range of motion. I don't mean isometric pieces aren't important just that they should be recognized as being a secondary function to the primary movers.

But in the manner you are thinking it's very relevant how forces are appropriately transferred. Good observation.
 
Yah, if I had made sure to increase more gradually last year, I may not have run into the injury or strain issues, and so might've been further along than I am now. It's hard to say, but it's definitely better to be safe than sorry. If we think in terms of years and not weeks or months, then slow increases really add up.

I've never thought about that sort of wave. Didn't you try something like that before? Would the load increases be done at a steady set/rep-count? Or would you decrease sets/reps as the load increases? I'm not convinced about the benefit of training below 90% effort-level. I mean that in distinction from 90% 1RM. So, for example, I can do 3x3 @ 90%1RM, which would also be about 90% effort level, since I can do three sets fairly comfortably without risk of missing a rep or technical breakdown. Likewise, if I do 3 x 10 @ 70%1RM, it is still about 90% effort level, for the same reasons. Basically, I'm always doing training maxes, which I would define as challenging yet sustainable work loads, and ones I can recover from in 48 hours.

Now with the scheme you laid out, if you're keeping the reps and sets constant, then you're starting out at a considerably lower effort level, building intensity until you're close to 100%. I think this is more of an advanced level training protocol. I think Rippetoe and a few others have said that at the intermediate level, a cycle or wave needn't be more than a week. For a novice of course, a cycle is one workout.

On the other hand, you're training pretty hard in your cycling and running, which isn't accounted for in Rippetoe's prescriptions, so perhaps a more advanced training cycle would be beneficial, I dunno. Something to consider though.

I guess my wave concept is mostly a 'cover all the bases' routine. Like in running, once I found out there were basically three kinds of pace--anaerobic, tempo, and aerobic--it occurred to me, from a general fitness perspective, and as someone who generally runs just three times a week, that it would probably be best to do all three kinds of run each week, to train all three energy systems, stress the heart in different ways, and have three different ROMs as well.

So after reading up on set and rep parameters in strength training, I found out there are also basically three different rep-ranges, each of which provokes a slightly different stress and adaption. There also appear to be three basic set/rep parameters--volume, density, intensity. So, again, from a general fitness perspective and as someone who lifts three times a week, it seemed like it might be a good idea to train all three different rep ranges and parameters each week. After just a few weeks, it seems like a good way to go, but it's too early to tell for sure. I do think it makes it easier to recover, and may also be a good way to build strength over the long run, while limiting the risk of overtraining. I find it also keeps me mentally fresh because each set/rep protocol presents a different sort of challenge.

Ok I've been thinking a little more about this and I think I am going to schedule this wave pattern over the next 8 weeks to see how it works. I haven't tried something this specific but its very similar to Wendler's 5/3/1 program. It will look like this:

INC.JPG

For the DL I have a 5kg increase between sets and then a 5kg increase after 4 weeks, for the bench its 5kg/2.5 kg and then a 5kg after 4 weeks. The press has 2.5kgs and 2.5kgs increases respectively.

I am also going to preschedule my workouts here the day or week before to reign in some exuberance. Hopefully these two tweaks will help.

After the 8 weeks if I take my final 2RM set and divide by an estimated 95% (of 1RM) I will basically be where I started? Hmm. I might rework this a bit.
 

Attachments

  • INC.JPG
    INC.JPG
    185.2 KB · Views: 4
ahh that's irritating I just wrote a post and it disappeared...

Anyway glad to see you are looking more into bench press form. I like CT's method but you should note he is probably the only one I have ever seen to recommend shrugging. It's really not a common cue. So skip it and focus on just squeezing the shoulder blades together if that works better.

I would have to disagree about calling the 4 big lifts full body lifts. If you really breakdown the lifts the non-dominant muscles are only supporting via isometric contraction and really don't have any eccentric or concentric contraction. Hence I wouldn't agree that the bench is at all similar to the push press? He actually says quite a few funny things in this video, I'm pretty sure geared PL's hold the bar pretty wide not in close? Anyway the only lifts that I think could legitimately be called a full body lift is probably the C&J. Where virtually every muscle group would be going through a full range of motion. I don't mean isometric pieces aren't important just that they should be recognized as being a secondary function to the primary movers.

But in the manner you are thinking it's very relevant how forces are appropriately transferred. Good observation.
Did the disappeared post say more than you posted here?

Yeah, the shrugging cue doesn't seem right. Wouldn't that release the tightness in the scapulae? Like I said, I take everything CT says with a grain of salt. On his squat video, his minion doesn't even break parallel, for example. CT's main strength seems to be in summarizing st protocols with an open-mind. He's obviously juiced so I don't know if his specific training suggestions mean much for nonbodybuilders/nondrugaddicts.

I don't know if I agree with your definition of isometric. The abdominal muscles are used isometrically because they're used in opposition to the spinal muscles, to support the latter. However, I think even in bench press leg drive, the legs are actually transferring some force through the kinetic chain to the upper body. Not as much as in the push press, of course, but I don't think the function of leg drive is pure tightness as it is for the abdominals in, for example, the squat.

I guess perhaps with the pullup, a tight lower body might function isometrically, same with a strict row.

Back to an earlier discussion of how to program upper body variation, I wonder if you would consider set/rep variation instead exercise variation, something like a Volume day on Monday and an Intensity day on Friday? I guess either way works for an intermediate-style weekly wave.

Yeah, that looks pretty similar to Wendler's wave. It will be interesting to see how you like it. I might try something like that when I begin to plateau with the weekly wave. I'm a little bummed you're considering getting out of sync with our eight-week cycles though. It's always fun at the end and beginning to compare notes, and observe each other's progress during the cycle.

Is there any reason you didn't include squats in your table?
 
Yeah cause I suck at squats. I think I prefer ultra slow increases with them. I might sit at 100kgs for a the rest of the cycle to really get comfortable with that weight, which I consider where they begin to get difficult.

I am going to keep in line with our cycles, I think next week will be a light week and then the following week 5 I will start to use the table weights for those three lifts, which isn't that much different than this week just slower progression. Everything else will be the same. I will continue with this plan for another 8 weeks, then I will have 16 weeks to asses this split style of training.

I'm not sure yet about the upper programming. I think there might be some validity into programming multiple rep/set schemes in each day vs. doing all heavy or volume in one. It seems like there are two radically different trains of thought, there is the Rip/Pavel/DJ perspective of training all the main lifts each day at varying intensities and then West Side/Wendler et al. who program one main lift a day and then supplement with assistance work. Both of them seem to work as well. Which is optimal, I have no idea.

If I were to do them in split days like you I would really try to assess lift ordering to see if there is any degradation of lifts that come later in the session. I would always have more difficulty with the press if it followed the bench. Also it would be good to pay attention to the next day and how it affects your overall recovery. At this point I am not sure if I would do it that way because I think my upper lifts respond to variation a little better.
 
Yeah cause I suck at squats. I think I prefer ultra slow increases with them. I might sit at 100kgs for a the rest of the cycle to really get comfortable with that weight, which I consider where they begin to get difficult.

I am going to keep in line with our cycles, I think next week will be a light week and then the following week 5 I will start to use the table weights for those three lifts, which isn't that much different than this week just slower progression. Everything else will be the same. I will continue with this plan for another 8 weeks, then I will have 16 weeks to asses this split style of training.

I'm not sure yet about the upper programming. I think there might be some validity into programming multiple rep/set schemes in each day vs. doing all heavy or volume in one. It seems like there are two radically different trains of thought, there is the Rip/Pavel/DJ perspective of training all the main lifts each day at varying intensities and then West Side/Wendler et al. who program one main lift a day and then supplement with assistance work. Both of them seem to work as well. Which is optimal, I have no idea.

If I were to do them in split days like you I would really try to assess lift ordering to see if there is any degradation of lifts that come later in the session. I would always have more difficulty with the press if it followed the bench. Also it would be good to pay attention to the next day and how it affects your overall recovery. At this point I am not sure if I would do it that way because I think my upper lifts respond to variation a little better.
Yeah, the sacroiliac injury or pulled muscle was a blessing in disguise, because it forced me to reset the squat. Now I'm progressing more slowly but I'm trying to maintain impeccable form and decent depth. So for me too, ultra small increases are a good way to make sure I don't get ahead of myself and sacrifice form or depth in the pursuit of numbers. I like five-pound increases quite a lot, even if it's just for a week. I'm almost thinking I would like 2.5 pound increases for the upper body stuff. This is totally contrary to my prior MO, when I wouldn't even consider anything less than a 10-pound increase. But the smaller increases keep my form in line, and mentally, it's nice to have these little load victories distributed more frequently.

In a similar vein, I'm thinking this stubbed toe might also be a blessing in disguise. It occurred to me last week that one thing I could do to lessen the impact would be to run hills. So I started on Tuesday, and will do more today. I think just running hills for a while will help rid me of the mileage mentality once and for all, and just run in a way that's best for increasing fitness.

So both injuries have helped me focus more on quality, less on quantity, and will hopefully help me ultimately pursue greater quantities, like a bigger max squat, or a faster half marathon.

As far as programming validity, I think someone said that really, all programs work. The best program is the one that keeps you coming back for more and allows you to train consistently, right? Because up to the intermediate level, consistently is all that really counts. Our bodies are designed to adapt and they will if given a consistent stimulus to do so.

That said, I do think Rip is probably right that up to the intermediate level, a program that involves cycles lasting more than a week is probably needlessly complicated. I guess a lot of novices and intermediate lifters have had success with Wendler's program, but he himself didn't start using it until he was at the advanced or elite level. For me anyway, I feel like a higher frequency approach is the way to go, since I'm still ironing out details in technique, and am still making neural gains just by repeating the movements often. It'll be a while before the gains are mostly skeletal-muscular. Still, at some point I might shift into more of a biweekly cycle for my two strongest lifts, the deadlift and bench press, once I reach a certain level with them.

However, as I've noted, your case isn't typical, because you're also trying to improve your ultra running and mountain biking, so maybe a longer cycle program with more gradual increases is the way to go. I wonder if anyone else has tried this approach while training for endurance?

I do think ordering is important, and there is some degradation towards the end of my workouts you're right. That's why I moved the upper body pulls towards the end, because form and load aren't as important for them at this time, and why I've placed the squat before the deadlift, and the overhead press before the bench press. If and when I achieve the Iron Ratio and everything is balanced, I may have to alternate the order on a weekly, biweekly, or monthly basis so that each lift is worked when I'm freshest. Or, alternatively, go to an AB or ABC split, with three or two main lifts per workout. But I don't think I could do just one main lift per workout, or per week, as in a Westside/Wendler program. That would be too infrequent, and I would miss the full-body pump. But once again, it's worth noting that Rippetoe isn't against this kind of programming, he just thinks it's an advanced form of programming. In his Practical Programming book he outlines many different kinds of advanced programming and they all involved cycles well beyond the week. Rippetoe's point is simply that for the novice, no cycle is necessary, each workout is a cycle upon which the next workout will build, but for the intermediate, a weekly cycle will provoke the greater adaptation, once one stops making gains virtually every workout.

Probably the most likely next step for me would be putting the squat and deadlift on different days, then sort out one upper body push and one upper body pull for each of those. I think I did that for a while last year. Then I could do more sets for each exercise and/or more assistance. With my six-lift, fullbody workouts, I really need close to an hour to get everything in, and even then it sometimes feels a bit rushed.

Saturday - 03.21
WU - 50 jump rope, 10 Swings 32kg, 2 x 8 inverted Rows, 2 x 8 Ab Rollouts
Power Cleans - 6 x 2 @ 70 kgs
Press - 2 x 5/3/2 @ 60/62.5/65 kgs
Pull Ups - 6 x 3 @ 5kgs
Push Press - 3 x 8 @ 65kgs
Did you discover time travel, or do you guys have a weekday savings time?
 
Did you discover time travel, or do you guys have a weekday savings time?

Ha no

I am also going to preschedule my workouts here the day or week before to reign in some exuberance. Hopefully these two tweaks will help.


That said, I do think Rip is probably right that up to the intermediate level, a program that involves cycles lasting more than a week is probably needlessly complicated. I guess a lot of novices and intermediate lifters have had success with Wendler's program, but he himself didn't start using it until he was at the advanced or elite level. For me anyway, I feel like a higher frequency approach is the way to go, since I'm still ironing out details in technique, and am still making neural gains just by repeating the movements often. It'll be a while before the gains are mostly skeletal-muscular. Still, at some point I might shift into more of a biweekly cycle for my two strongest lifts, the deadlift and bench press, once I reach a certain level with them.

However, as I've noted, your case isn't typical, because you're also trying to improve your ultra running and mountain biking, so maybe a longer cycle program with more gradual increases is the way to go. I wonder if anyone else has tried this approach while training for endurance?

I do think ordering is important, and there is some degradation towards the end of my workouts you're right. That's why I moved the upper body pulls towards the end, because form and load aren't as important for them at this time, and why I've placed the squat before the deadlift, and the overhead press before the bench press. If and when I achieve the Iron Ratio and everything is balanced, I may have to alternate the order on a weekly, biweekly, or monthly basis so that each lift is worked when I'm freshest. Or, alternatively, go to an AB or ABC split, with three or two main lifts per workout. But I don't think I could do just one main lift per workout, or per week, as in a Westside/Wendler program. That would be too infrequent, and I would miss the full-body pump. But once again, it's worth noting that Rippetoe isn't against this kind of programming, he just thinks it's an advanced form of programming. In his Practical Programming book he outlines many different kinds of advanced programming and they all involved cycles well beyond the week. Rippetoe's point is simply that for the novice, no cycle is necessary, each workout is a cycle upon which the next workout will build, but for the intermediate, a weekly cycle will provoke the greater adaptation, once one stops making gains virtually every workout.

Probably the most likely next step for me would be putting the squat and deadlift on different days, then sort out one upper body push and one upper body pull for each of those. I think I did that for a while last year. Then I could do more sets for each exercise and/or more assistance. With my six-lift, fullbody workouts, I really need close to an hour to get everything in, and even then it sometimes feels a bit rushed.

I should give practical programming a read, one of these days I probably will. You are right though I am thinking more advanced programs, not in my capabilities, but in meshing the two together and making recovery a priority. It seems too that what PL's do isn't really that good for a runner either, they just seem to have the best selection of lifts. I'm with you though I like to have some full body lift in all of my workouts, which is why I do power cleans now.

http://bretcontreras.com/how-to-maximize-concurrent-training/

"1.Use ET wisely, and strategically program it into your RT blocks. Intersperse HIIT and low-to-moderate intensity ET to keep ET volume at a minimum, while reaping the benefits of ET."

I am trying to figure out where the hell he gets the HIIT conclusion from? Anyway I need to stop reading these things.
 
Ha no

I should give practical programming a read, one of these days I probably will. You are right though I am thinking more advanced programs, not in my capabilities, but in meshing the two together and making recovery a priority. It seems too that what PL's do isn't really that good for a runner either, they just seem to have the best selection of lifts. I'm with you though I like to have some full body lift in all of my workouts, which is why I do power cleans now.

http://bretcontreras.com/how-to-maximize-concurrent-training/

"1.Use ET wisely, and strategically program it into your RT blocks. Intersperse HIIT and low-to-moderate intensity ET to keep ET volume at a minimum, while reaping the benefits of ET."

I am trying to figure out where the hell he gets the HIIT conclusion from?
I like to read fitness stuff while stretching out in my straddle contraption. It's a nice break and doesn't require concentration. Even though we both find Rippetoe's rhetorical style annoying at times, I have to say, if I were to recommend st books to anyone, his would be at the top of the list. I recently bought Dos Remedios "Power Training" used for cheap. It doesn't say anything new, but it lays out all the exercise variations well. I became intrigued by Dos Remedios because his rep-count percentages seemed spot-on with mine. Rippetoe's Practical Programming probably won't tell you anything you don't know already either, but it's well-organized and it's nice to have it all explained in one place.

Yah, keep letting me/us know how the Power Cleans are coming. I agree, of all the meathead training protocols, I align more closely with the Powerlifting style. I didn't even realize I used to do more of a bodybuilding style, because I never really thought that much about it. But almost all of the internet guys who make the most sense to me come from a powerlifter background. Especially if we go back a generation or two of strongmen, the fullbody routine based on basic barbell lifts was the norm. I just think it's funny that I'm getting into this stuff so much. I can't even believe that I'm trying to learn a powerlifter's bench technique, but the logic for doing so seems sound and in keeping with my general fitness principles and goals. But the exaggerated arch, limited ROM, and geared shirts and stuff just seem ridiculous. I looked into the RAW classifications, and it seems like I have a chance at a Class II Total qualification, for sure Class III.
http://www.lift.net/2013/05/09/classification-standards-for-raw-elite-uspa/
I think one secret to aging well is to maintain physical and mental goals, like increasing one's squat or learning a new language. So, although I feel a little ridiculous as a wanna-be powerlifter, it's making my workouts awesome and really providing direction. Hopefully in the not-too-distant future I can work on pace per distance for running too.

I missed the Contreras article, thanks. I think the HIIT recommendation is pretty common but you're right he doesn't really support it in the article. The article in general was really timely for me insofar as he recommends higher intensity running once in a while while doing concurrent training. With my recent decision to run hills in order to get in some aerobic conditioning while rehabbing my tender left big toe, the logic of this sort of programming has really hit me. Something like hills on Tuesday, Tempo on Thursday, and LSD on Saturday. It would involve a reduction in weekly mileage, but it would probably mesh better with my recent st goals than a bunch of aerobic running. Hill work also involves less eccentric muscle use, so less post-run soreness, right? I've been thinking about this kind of weekly running routine for a long time, but maybe now I'll actually implement it. He also recommends rowing or cycling as a way to conserve the legs for st, while still building aerobic capacity, so maybe I could convert one weekday run into cycling? Now I'm approaching your MO!

I thought the article was also timely in confirming my belief that part of the reason I've been bonking during st workouts recently is because my aerobic capacity is so poorly developed these days.
Anyway I need to stop reading these things.
I've been telling myself that for a while, but then I keep discovering a few extra things worth knowing. The general feeling, however, is that my st reading will be tapering soon. I know I haven't read anything about running for a long time.
 
apparently, i like to avoid doing "real work" by reading t-nation articles and applying the "but, if you were a barefoot runner, that wouldn't be such a big deal" principle.

case in point: https://www.t-nation.com/training/no-weights-calf-training . so, this guy's idea is that a reasonable yardstick for the baby cows is to be able to do 20 one-leg calf-raises. sounds good. ok, so i won't say that it is super-easy, but it is definitely possible, even after having run seven and a half miles barefoot.

naturally, he was struck by how many of his people (including himself) couldn't meet the criterion. now, he goes on to state: "It's best to perform the calf raise without shoes, but it's not absolutely necessary." which makes me wonder if people's limiting factor was actually the calves or the feet? i know that when i have done, you know, like 1000 calf raises in one day, that some of those tendons in the bottom of your foot start letting you know of their existence. so if you're not used to having to use them because the shoe does that structural work for you, i can imagine that you might poop out in the calf raises early; kind of like when the bar starts to slip out of your hand during deadlifts.

also: "It [the 20-raise criterion] doesn't take into account a guy that wants to build his calves to match the circumference of his upper arms – the gold standard ratio that looks the best for any hard-training guy." hmm... it looks like i need to add about 3 inches to my arms so they'll catch up to my puny calves.... :)

we now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bare Lee and Abide
apparently, i like to avoid doing "real work" by reading t-nation articles and applying the "but, if you were a barefoot runner, that wouldn't be such a big deal" principle.

case in point: https://www.t-nation.com/training/no-weights-calf-training . so, this guy's idea is that a reasonable yardstick for the baby cows is to be able to do 20 one-leg calf-raises. sounds good. ok, so i won't say that it is super-easy, but it is definitely possible, even after having run seven and a half miles barefoot.

naturally, he was struck by how many of his people (including himself) couldn't meet the criterion. now, he goes on to state: "It's best to perform the calf raise without shoes, but it's not absolutely necessary." which makes me wonder if people's limiting factor was actually the calves or the feet? i know that when i have done, you know, like 1000 calf raises in one day, that some of those tendons in the bottom of your foot start letting you know of their existence. so if you're not used to having to use them because the shoe does that structural work for you, i can imagine that you might poop out in the calf raises early; kind of like when the bar starts to slip out of your hand during deadlifts.

also: "It [the 20-raise criterion] doesn't take into account a guy that wants to build his calves to match the circumference of his upper arms – the gold standard ratio that looks the best for any hard-training guy." hmm... it looks like i need to add about 3 inches to my arms so they'll catch up to my puny calves.... :)

we now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.
Very brave. Most articles in T-Nation seem silly. Even the ones about strength training are mostly about telling you you're doing something wrong, just like women's magazines are constantly coming up with new diets or butt toners or new sexual advice.

Yah, you know, it's funny they're unaware that calf muscles are actually foot muscles, when bodybuilders know that forearms are built by taxing the hand. Out of sight, out of mind I guess. Also, bodybuilders seem to want to get every frickin' muscle to bulge out of proportion except the foot muscles. Well, OK, I guess they don't try to hypertrophy their facial muscles either. Still, you'd think at least one bodybuilder would become known for his gnarly, muscular feet. Or maybe there is one already.
 
Yah, those kind of articles are much more interesting than the ones on nutrition or veal training. I bought a belt and maybe one or two other things from them, but I didn't look around their site much. Thanks, but also, damn you. Now I have a new place to go during my breaks and obsess a little more about this stuff, just as my interest was tapering. Here's another article about that style of training that I found while snooping around: http://www.elitefts.com/education/novice/elitefts-classic-training-the-bench-press-by-jim-wendler/

Anyway, I could see moving towards this sort of system once I meet my basic strength goals. But I think slow lifts are the way to go for me now, with a little plyometrics like box jumps and bench hops thrown in once in a while, if I can ever get to it. My basic idea is to get strong first, while I still can, and then work more on conditioning. The recent article in T-Nation abs and glutes had a pretty cool ab video. I didn't read the article, but that was a killer routine. Alternatively, I could maybe lower the loads on my Volume Day and do the lifts with greater bar speed. Then I'd essentially be doing the Westside, with my Stamina Day corresponding to their Repetition Day, and my Intensity Day corresponding to their Max effort day. I guess once you learn about the handful of basic parameters, there are hundreds of programming possibilities.

Still, seems like the Westside School is more of an advanced method. For intermediate, I wonder if dynamic training is all that important to progress?

Perhaps it could be good for you to incorporate some more dynamic training given your race goals though, especially for the mountain biking? This could be another instance where an advanced st training protocol could be adapted to concurrent training at the intermediate level.