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

Not sure if it's worth trying, you never listen, but here it goes:

Those problems were fixed while running, five miles or less, leading to greater running, including a PR for distance--16 miles.

With the ITBS, for example, I had no idea what it was until right in the middle of a four-mile tempo run it cut me down within 10 steps, out of the blue. Never happened before, so I don't know how I could be blamed for not foreseeing it. I learned how to do the ITB stretch and it went away. Concurrent strength training may have helped too. Now if I ever feel even slight tightness there, I stop to stretch. Problem solved. Later that year I went on to run 10-16 miles on a weekly basis.

All kidding aside, I think most of the running issues occurred simply because I assumed I could run with little maintenance just as I always had. I've found middle-age running requires more massaging and stretching -- you know, old meat is tough meat.

For the lifting, the hamstring strain is still a mystery to me. It was probably overtraining, but hard to say. The sacroiliac issue was pure stupidity--not warming up properly and then ignoring a warning sign, not once, but twice, so I give you that.

How long before you disappear again?

The problem with getting injured when new to an activity be it running, cycling, lifting...is not recognigsing the warning signs particularly the damn ITB but once you go through something and get more experience on the sport and most importantly knowing your body you get to be pretty good at knowing what every little niggle means.
Sorry about your SI injury and I really hope that you get over soon, the Si is a real tough injury to heal.
 
Yah sugar is really bad for you. I have a little bit in my espresso, but otherwise stay clear of the stuff. I like to have a beer or glass of wine at night, and I'm not giving those up.

Yah, slow load increases are the way to go, just as losing weight is best done slowly. I'm even thinking of trying a 2.5-pound increase for my OH Press. More psychological than physical perhaps. But yesterday 125 felt a little too easy, but 130 might be a little too hard for the 4 x 5 on Monday.

I think it would be hard to overtrain at just an hour per day, six days a week, especially if one is progressing gradually and giving the body time to adapt. The 48-hour recovery rule works pretty well for me, and then on the weekend I have 72 hours for recovery. I think I should be able to run 15-25 mpw, deadlift 400, squat 320, and run a half-marathon in two hours. I think those are very reasonable goals, very attainable with a gradual, consistent approach.

I wish I had some fractional plates for the press, its such a particular lift in regards to weight. I always think how the hell can 5lbs make that much of difference.

I really like the infrequent and inconsistent running schedule I have been doing. I really think a ten miler once a week and a hill day might even be perfect on the running end of things for me if I were to give up running longer races. Then bike a couple of times a week if you want and that's it.
 
The problem with getting injured when new to an activity be it running, cycling, lifting...is not recognigsing the warning signs particularly the damn ITB but once you go through something and get more experience on the sport and most importantly knowing your body you get to be pretty good at knowing what every little niggle means.
Sorry about your SI injury and I really hope that you get over soon, the Si is a real tough injury to heal.
I agree in general, although with the ITBS, it literally came out of nowhere, with no warning sign, no tightness, no soreness, nothing. Same with the MCL issue and calf cramp

And also, as I've said, I used to run up into my early 40s without having to think about any of this at all, and I was wearing clunky running shoes too, which, the theory goes, should have led to injuries. I think that's been the biggest lesson, is to recognize the effects of age. Not that getting older is stopping me from doing anything, and in fact I'm actually stronger right now than I've ever been, but I just have to be more careful.

So I was hardly new to running or lifting, but you're right, I have gotten better at interpreting the niggle oracles. I'm being particularly cautious about the sacroiliac thing, and have programmed in a bunch of safeguards. BTW, my chiro said it was the sacroiliac joint, but I first thought it was a muscle pull, caused by not being warmed up enough, even though I was doing submaximal weight. Once I began massaging it, it cleared up within a week, which seems to support my diagnosis. But the pain was pretty bad for a while, as the inflammed area put pressure on the sciatic nerve.

What is your experience with SI injury?

Hope you stick around a bit longer this time, it's good to have you participating again.
 
I wish I had some fractional plates for the press, its such a particular lift in regards to weight. I always think how the hell can 5lbs make that much of difference.

I really like the infrequent and inconsistent running schedule I have been doing. I really think a ten miler once a week and a hill day might even be perfect on the running end of things for me if I were to give up running longer races. Then bike a couple of times a week if you want and that's it.
Yah, I know. Five pounds shouldn't be a deal breaker, right? Cool to hear it's not just me. I'll see how I feel doing 3 x 3 x 130 on Friday, and try your idea of going for reps on the third set. I should be able to pick up some cheap 1.25-lbs plates at Play it again Sports.

I could see subbing in one cycling day for a running day, and doing something like you propose for your post-ultra days. The problem is I live in the middle of the city, so there aren't too many stretches where you can cycle for any length without having to deal with either cars or pedestrians (walking/jogging).
 
What is your experience with SI injury?

Hope you stick around a bit longer this time, it's good to have you participating again.
Not sure if my SI condition has a cure other than surgery I have a cyst in the joint.
 
Bummer. Does it cause pressure on your sciatic nerve? That was awful. I had trouble sleeping more than 3-4 hours at a time, and painkillers didn't help.

You bet, all the way down to the calves but I can't say for sure if it is the SI or the buldging disc on L4/L5 all I know that the whole thing sucks. I keep telling myself that it could be worse, at least I can manage some running.
I don't take pain killers I manage my missery with physical therapy...lots of it.
So good luck to you getting rid of it.
 
You bet, all the way down to the calves but I can't say for sure if it is the SI or the buldging disc on L4/L5 all I know that the whole thing sucks. I keep telling myself that it could be worse, at least I can manage some running.
I don't take pain killers I manage my missery with physical therapy...lots of it.
So good luck to you getting rid of it.
Wow, that sucks. Is it related to your collapsible back?

Mine seems to have healed. Just a week of massaging and stretching in mid January seems to have taken care of it, but I'm proceeding extremely cautiously with the deadlifts. More than two months later, I still haven't attempted the same load, but I'm getting there. Even the slightest hint of a niggle and I put the bar down. As you know, the pain is pretty bad, so more so than with the other injuries you give me crap about, I'm highly motivated to make sure this never happens again.

All the best Dama. Any plans for coming up to the Twins? Maybe we could get Scedastic to come down from St. Cloud for a little group run. It would be nice to get "chicked" by my two favorite BRS chicks.
 
Wow, that sucks. Is it related to your collapsible back?

Mine seems to have healed. Just a week of massaging and stretching in mid January seems to have taken care of it, but I'm proceeding extremely cautiously with the deadlifts. More than two months later, I still haven't attempted the same load, but I'm getting there. Even the slightest hint of a niggle and I put the bar down. As you know, the pain is pretty bad, so more so than with the other injuries you give me crap about, I'm highly motivated to make sure this never happens again.

All the best Dama. Any plans for coming up to the Twins? Maybe we could get Scedastic to come down from St. Cloud for a little group run. It would be nice to get "chicked" by my two favorite BRS chicks.

This is the case as who was first the chicken or the egg the more I read about it the more confuse I become most articles that I have read say that a SI joint injury can cause lower back issues, you know everything is connected.
That'll be lovely I really want to get together with you and Scedastic for a nice run.
I'll let you know when we'll be coming to the cities, hopefuly this Summer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bare Lee
i noticed today that i have actually been getting my workouts in, so i declared a fool-around-day. i'm happy to report that despite de-emphasizing the press and deadlift by moving them to the end with reduced load and rep counts (and then skipping them entirely when interrupted or short on time) that they still seem to be ok. i was hoping to sneak up on a new best, but settled for matching on the press (90lbs). of course, it didn't feel quite as solid as previously, but the bar still went up (veeeeerrrry slooooowwwwly). on deadlifts, it is now official that the grip is the main problem. at 245lbs, the bar came up and back down in a controlled manner. at 255lbs (the would be new best), the fingers just peeled open on the way up and the bar got kinda dropped after being briefly braced on my knees. happily, the plates stayed on and the weights landed where they were supposed to on my little boards with the mats on top. so the hardwood floor is still intact. my rental deposit appreciates that. :)

then, for the fun of it, i tried overhead squats with just the bar for a couple sets. the leg part feels pretty similar to how i do the "normal" squats, but there is more arch in the back and tension in those stabilizers because of where the bar ends up above my head. they seem like they could be entertaining when the time comes to mix things up or on fool-around days like today. but clearly, i would need to start with the empty bar and move up really slowly seeing as i dumped on my bottom once with the nothing when i wasn't paying close enough attention...
 
i noticed today that i have actually been getting my workouts in, so i declared a fool-around-day. i'm happy to report that despite de-emphasizing the press and deadlift by moving them to the end with reduced load and rep counts (and then skipping them entirely when interrupted or short on time) that they still seem to be ok. i was hoping to sneak up on a new best, but settled for matching on the press (90lbs). of course, it didn't feel quite as solid as previously, but the bar still went up (veeeeerrrry slooooowwwwly). on deadlifts, it is now official that the grip is the main problem. at 245lbs, the bar came up and back down in a controlled manner. at 255lbs (the would be new best), the fingers just peeled open on the way up and the bar got kinda dropped after being briefly braced on my knees. happily, the plates stayed on and the weights landed where they were supposed to on my little boards with the mats on top. so the hardwood floor is still intact. my rental deposit appreciates that. :)

then, for the fun of it, i tried overhead squats with just the bar for a couple sets. the leg part feels pretty similar to how i do the "normal" squats, but there is more arch in the back and tension in those stabilizers because of where the bar ends up above my head. they seem like they could be entertaining when the time comes to mix things up or on fool-around days like today. but clearly, i would need to start with the empty bar and move up really slowly seeing as i dumped on my bottom once with the nothing when i wasn't paying close enough attention...

Are you mixing grips? Or still using the double overhand? If so start mixing them when you are on your top set and see what happens. Your grip will get stronger either way don't worry. Also do you have chalk?
 
Nuckols is one of the good eggs I stumbled upon Sunday. Here's another article by Viada on his site: http://www.strengtheory.com/practic...ombining-cardiovascular-training-and-lifting/
Abide has already posted articles by Viada, right?

Here's an article advocating a volume approach: http://www.strengtheory.com/more-is-more/

BA, I've had the same trouble with deadlift (pronated) grip, but like Abide says, it caught up to my load. Chalk helps too.
 
Yeah I have, unfortunately most of his articles are cookie cutter type ones and don't really get into the ultra world. Some good points though that we have discussed

Exercise selection to vary stressors, this is more of the interference issues and modalities of running we have discussed.
Recovery and refueling
Progressive overload and accumulation

I'd be curious to see what kind of programs he would give to an ultra runner. Hi articles are also very focused on competing and racing, which for me don't really matter that much. Waking up on Monday after an event and being able to lift or run is my typical goal.

That second article was an interesting read, twice a week sessions at ridiculously high reps. I would imagine those guys had some crazy size growth to be gaining 80lbs on there squats.
I'd be curious if the easy strength workout would have similar results, it should as you are squatting/deadlifting 5 times a week for ten reps a session and the weight is very likely around 80%. So total volume is about the same.
 
There really isn't much out there in internet land related to both long distance running and heavy lifting. Too bad most of the others doing it are also involved in the cult.
 
Yeah I have, unfortunately most of his articles are cookie cutter type ones and don't really get into the ultra world. Some good points though that we have discussed

Exercise selection to vary stressors, this is more of the interference issues and modalities of running we have discussed.
Recovery and refueling
Progressive overload and accumulation

I'd be curious to see what kind of programs he would give to an ultra runner. Hi articles are also very focused on competing and racing, which for me don't really matter that much. Waking up on Monday after an event and being able to lift or run is my typical goal.

That second article was an interesting read, twice a week sessions at ridiculously high reps. I would imagine those guys had some crazy size growth to be gaining 80lbs on there squats.
I'd be curious if the easy strength workout would have similar results, it should as you are squatting/deadlifting 5 times a week for ten reps a session and the weight is very likely around 80%. So total volume is about the same.
Yah, like you, given that my running goals are simple and modest, even simpler and more modest than yours in fact, I always like to dumb-down the takeaways when I read that sort of article. What I understood is that if I adopt a simple EOD protocol, alternating lifting and running, and only train an hour per day, I probably got the interference issue more or less covered. For you, it's more complicated, but since you're not high-performance, the solution can still be relatively simple, and it seems like you found a good one with your upper/lower split and four-week cycle, limited running, and cycling substitute.

What I've liked most about Nuckols and Viada's conclusions is that they support Wendler's similar idea that a good aerobic base, beside conferring the obvious health benefits, will, pace current Meathead orthodoxy, increase your work capacity to lift. I mean, I've enjoyed getting up to speed on the meathead sites, and I've learned that strength training has a lot more going on in it than I thought, but it still seems to me that it's dominated by a bunch of young, stupid, vain idiots who like to call each other names. And now there's this whole anti-cardio campaign going on.

It just seems so obvious to me that running or any other aerobic activity is good for you. It was good to be reminded that cycling is lower impact than running, so it might make a better aerobic companion to st, to minimize tissue damage and catabolism, but this too is pretty obvious if we think about it for more than a minute. The meathead prejudice against cardio is just another example of group-think run amok. Shows you how easy it is for fascism to arise.

Anyway, I like the more objective, calm perspective of Nuckols, Tuchscherer, and others. You know, the grown-ups.

But with Nuckols's review of that study on volume, I guess whenever people make incredible gains like that, especially in this case when they have all been training for years and squat above BW, I always wonder what the hell their training was like before the study.

"These were experienced lifters with an average of five to eight years under the bar and an average squat of ~155kg. Every group had non-negligible strength average strength gains. Every person in the 4-set group made strength gains, and the average strength gains over 10 weeks in the 8-set group were around 37kg (82lbs)."

After five to eight years of training you only got your squat up to 340 lbs? But then in just weeks you increase it by 82 pounds -- something like a 25% increase? Even on steriods that seems far-fetched. I mean, I put something like 80 pounds on my deadlift and squat last year, from 275 to 355 and and maybe 175 to 275, respectively, but it was only because I was relatively untrained in those lifts. The next 80 pounds will take at least a year, probably much longer.

Nuckols doesn't voice any skepticism at all about these miraculous claims. It's like Thibaudeau over at T-Nation rolling out yet another "program" that's going to add 10 pounds of lean muscle, or 30 pounds to your bench, or some-such, in just 12 weeks.

Anyway, I've about had it with this stuff. I'm getting to feel like I know about as much as I need to know . . . Sets, Reps, Frequency, Volume, Intensity . . . I reread some stuff this morning, because I woke up with the Jones to get rid of my higher rep workout today and just do high intensity, but I became reconvinced that higher reps help build the mass that supports max efforts, and also help build work capacity, so the 5-8-3 wave stands.

Then I reread RTS about fatigue management, and dropping 5% to maintain the RPE, but really, this is just a more precise way of doing drop sets. So today I think I've decided to do eight reps at 75%, and then try to maintain that rep-count for straight sets across. If I can't maintain it, or perceive that I can't before I even try the next set, I'll drop five pounds. Simple.

I like Nuckols general point about volume, but Iggy also makes a point about not adding volume too quickly:

"Wait a minute. If you get a bigger training effect, why not just do more volume anyway? One answer is that there are practical limitations to how long and how often we can train as athletes. If your body becomes adapted to 405x5x10, guess what you have to do to produce further adaptations? Even more volume! At some point, you’re going to run out of resources in terms of time, energy, and willingness. Most of us are not professional athletes with the ability to spend 6-8 hours training every single day.

The second answer is that you’re actually short-circuiting your long term potential by hopping on a high volume program too early. Why? Well, if you work up to 5×10 slowly, you will have gone through more stress-recovery-adaptation cycles to get to that level of volume tolerance than the guy who jumped to 5×10 right off the bat.

To make it plain, you’re going to be stronger than your competitors at the same level of volume because you’ll be more adapted than they are. Your competitor who did 405x5x10 may initially pass you with his 7.5lbs jump to your 5lbs jump, but by the time you work up to 5×10, you’ll have experienced many 5lbs jumps rather than just one 7.5lbs jump. You’ll improve the entire time without pushing your volume tolerance needlessly high."

I take this to mean that you need to add load as well as volume, not one or the other. I think I've done this by adding just one set (plus one more for my two weakest lifts) to the 2x5 protocol of last year. If I follow Izzy's logic correctly, I should continue increasing loads at this volume level, then when I start to plateau, add more volume or frequency. Or just call it a day and be satisfied and maintain my gains.

BTW, have you ever tried a lever belt?

There really isn't much out there in internet land related to both long distance running and heavy lifting. Too bad most of the others doing it are also involved in the cult.
Because most people can't manage it. You're pretty unique.
 
i was also pretty surprised by those gains. it's not like they were starting at zero squat, they were putting up (what i would consider) decent numbers. but then they seem to make meaningful gains on that super simple plan. i can think of two major possibilities: 1) they hadn't *really* bothered to train the squat previously and were primarily focused on other things; and/or 2) consistency!

isn't there an old saw about "the best workout plan is the one you actually do" or stick with or are willing to do or whatever. so: a) they had probably under-loaded their squats previously (the "to failure" thing would probably get you higher volume than a "plan" because you don't have to be conservative about not missing a repetition: missing a repetition is the whole point) and b) they actually worked on their squat on a regular basis.

and so i don't know what to think about my approach. currently, i'm blasting out 5x6 on squats, so about 30 repetitions per outing and i'm getting at least 3 or 4 outings a week. on the other hand, they do seem to be getting a little stronger and more solid. but with the results from that study, i'll be at 600lbs in early june, right? :)

concerning strength training and endurance training, i am in agreement that it seems like there are not too many people out there trying to synthesize them. (let us now posit a unified theory of [non-]expertise....) of course, one has to wonder about epistemic closure and "you get what you pay for" and such. surely, we are getting some selection bias in our information because (by-and-large) we are relying on the omniscience of the search engine combing through free resources. thus, we wonder if the people who *really* know, won't say anything. on the other hand, those guys/gals limit their circle of knowledge by not talking to many other people in order to maintain aspirations of monopoly rents. thus, i would still be suspicious about whether they actually know what they're doing, or if they are just a little more confident in the exposition and instruction.

so, i guess we should band together and try to figure out ourselves and maybe many years from now someone will gain a little something from our experiences.
 
i was also pretty surprised by those gains. it's not like they were starting at zero squat, they were putting up (what i would consider) decent numbers. but then they seem to make meaningful gains on that super simple plan. i can think of two major possibilities: 1) they hadn't *really* bothered to train the squat previously and were primarily focused on other things; and/or 2) consistency!

isn't there an old saw about "the best workout plan is the one you actually do" or stick with or are willing to do or whatever. so: a) they had probably under-loaded their squats previously (the "to failure" thing would probably get you higher volume than a "plan" because you don't have to be conservative about not missing a repetition: missing a repetition is the whole point) and b) they actually worked on their squat on a regular basis.

and so i don't know what to think about my approach. currently, i'm blasting out 5x6 on squats, so about 30 repetitions per outing and i'm getting at least 3 or 4 outings a week. on the other hand, they do seem to be getting a little stronger and more solid. but with the results from that study, i'll be at 600lbs in early june, right? :)

concerning strength training and endurance training, i am in agreement that it seems like there are not too many people out there trying to synthesize them. (let us now posit a unified theory of [non-]expertise....) of course, one has to wonder about epistemic closure and "you get what you pay for" and such. surely, we are getting some selection bias in our information because (by-and-large) we are relying on the omniscience of the search engine combing through free resources. thus, we wonder if the people who *really* know, won't say anything. on the other hand, those guys/gals limit their circle of knowledge by not talking to many other people in order to maintain aspirations of monopoly rents. thus, i would still be suspicious about whether they actually know what they're doing, or if they are just a little more confident in the exposition and instruction.

so, i guess we should band together and try to figure out ourselves and maybe many years from now someone will gain a little something from our experiences.
There's probably some flaw like that in the study, but since these studies are almost never duplicated or confirmed, the flaw will never be discovered, and we'll continue to be fed these magic-pill replacements for hard work over time.

That's why I usually go with experienced trainers like Rippetoe or Tuchscherer (or McMillan and Magness for running) over studies. It's always the same damn thing. You do the big lifts, try to find some optimal mix of intensity, volume, and frequency, and then train hard and consistently. No big secret. For running, you try to optimize a mix of aerobic, tempo, and anaerobic running. If you're intermediate, you don't have to sweat the details. You'll get to 80% of your potential without really having to think about it. All these fancy programs and protocols are for people wanting to push beyond intermediate level to advanced or elite, as far as I can tell.

There's little money in endurance running or powerlifting, and they require different body types, so anyone with anything like elite ability in one would be foolish to lessen their chances at success by pursuing the other, and I doubt there would be much of a market for a trainer who could train both abilities equally well. That is, until ESPN invents a hybrid strongman/triathalon contest, like a powerthalon. But there's considerable hostility between a lot of people who like to lift and a lot of people who like to run ("Cardio-wuss!"-- "Neanderthal!"), so I wonder how big the audience would be. I enjoyed BA's paragraph, especially the bit about epistemic closure, but I wonder if the conspiratorial part holds true.

In any case, in my case, I've always thought of strength training and running as complementary components of a general fitness regimen, but I've never had aspirations to be particularly good at one or the other, so I've never felt much of conflict. I mean, I would like to squat at least 315, but I'm not going to stop running to speed the process along.
 
Yah, like you, given that my running goals are simple and modest, even simpler and more modest than yours in fact, I always like to dumb-down the takeaways when I read that sort of article. What I understood is that if I adopt a simple EOD protocol, alternating lifting and running, and only train an hour per day, I probably got the interference issue more or less covered. For you, it's more complicated, but since you're not high-performance, the solution can still be relatively simple, and it seems like you found a good one with your upper/lower split and four-week cycle, limited running, and cycling substitute.

What I've liked most about Nuckols and Viada's conclusions is that they support Wendler's similar idea that a good aerobic base, beside conferring the obvious health benefits, will, pace current Meathead orthodoxy, increase your work capacity to lift. I mean, I've enjoyed getting up to speed on the meathead sites, and I've learned that strength training has a lot more going on in it than I thought, but it still seems to me that it's dominated by a bunch of young, stupid, vain idiots who like to call each other names. And now there's this whole anti-cardio campaign going on.

It just seems so obvious to me that running or any other aerobic activity is good for you. It was good to be reminded that cycling is lower impact than running, so it might make a better aerobic companion to st, to minimize tissue damage and catabolism, but this too is pretty obvious if we think about it for more than a minute. The meathead prejudice against cardio is just another example of group-think run amok. Shows you how easy it is for fascism to arise.

Anyway, I like the more objective, calm perspective of Nuckols, Tuchscherer, and others. You know, the grown-ups.

But with Nuckols's review of that study on volume, I guess whenever people make incredible gains like that, especially in this case when they have all been training for years and squat above BW, I always wonder what the hell their training was like before the study.

"These were experienced lifters with an average of five to eight years under the bar and an average squat of ~155kg. Every group had non-negligible strength average strength gains. Every person in the 4-set group made strength gains, and the average strength gains over 10 weeks in the 8-set group were around 37kg (82lbs)."

After five to eight years of training you only got your squat up to 340 lbs? But then in just weeks you increase it by 82 pounds -- something like a 25% increase? Even on steriods that seems far-fetched. I mean, I put something like 80 pounds on my deadlift and squat last year, from 275 to 355 and and maybe 175 to 275, respectively, but it was only because I was relatively untrained in those lifts. The next 80 pounds will take at least a year, probably much longer.

Nuckols doesn't voice any skepticism at all about these miraculous claims. It's like Thibaudeau over at T-Nation rolling out yet another "program" that's going to add 10 pounds of lean muscle, or 30 pounds to your bench, or some-such, in just 12 weeks.

Anyway, I've about had it with this stuff. I'm getting to feel like I know about as much as I need to know . . . Sets, Reps, Frequency, Volume, Intensity . . . I reread some stuff this morning, because I woke up with the Jones to get rid of my higher rep workout today and just do high intensity, but I became reconvinced that higher reps help build the mass that supports max efforts, and also help build work capacity, so the 5-8-3 wave stands.

Then I reread RTS about fatigue management, and dropping 5% to maintain the RPE, but really, this is just a more precise way of doing drop sets. So today I think I've decided to do eight reps at 75%, and then try to maintain that rep-count for straight sets across. If I can't maintain it, or perceive that I can't before I even try the next set, I'll drop five pounds. Simple.

I like Nuckols general point about volume, but Iggy also makes a point about not adding volume too quickly:

"Wait a minute. If you get a bigger training effect, why not just do more volume anyway? One answer is that there are practical limitations to how long and how often we can train as athletes. If your body becomes adapted to 405x5x10, guess what you have to do to produce further adaptations? Even more volume! At some point, you’re going to run out of resources in terms of time, energy, and willingness. Most of us are not professional athletes with the ability to spend 6-8 hours training every single day.

The second answer is that you’re actually short-circuiting your long term potential by hopping on a high volume program too early. Why? Well, if you work up to 5×10 slowly, you will have gone through more stress-recovery-adaptation cycles to get to that level of volume tolerance than the guy who jumped to 5×10 right off the bat.

To make it plain, you’re going to be stronger than your competitors at the same level of volume because you’ll be more adapted than they are. Your competitor who did 405x5x10 may initially pass you with his 7.5lbs jump to your 5lbs jump, but by the time you work up to 5×10, you’ll have experienced many 5lbs jumps rather than just one 7.5lbs jump. You’ll improve the entire time without pushing your volume tolerance needlessly high."

I take this to mean that you need to add load as well as volume, not one or the other. I think I've done this by adding just one set (plus one more for my two weakest lifts) to the 2x5 protocol of last year. If I follow Izzy's logic correctly, I should continue increasing loads at this volume level, then when I start to plateau, add more volume or frequency. Or just call it a day and be satisfied and maintain my gains.

BTW, have you ever tried a lever belt?


Because most people can't manage it. You're pretty unique.

I suspect its more of a stupidity factor. I guess ultra running doesn't attract many runners, let alone lifters. I ran across this site that listed people who have done 400/50. I think doing a 400dl/100 miler within the same time frame would be pretty impressive. Or a 400dl/300bp/100 miler?

Here are some push pull ratings for 198
Respectable
275 BP
420 DL

Good
350 BP
520 DL

Great
400 BP
600 DL

Yeah the drop sets seem like an intuitive way to lift when going for higher rep lifts. I might work that concept in there, it would also help the flow as I could probably have less rest in between sets.

I've read a little more into 8x8's, I too cannot believe that they made those extraordinary gains. I wonder if they all graded to less depth in the squat? I'm gonna follow up on that.
Anyway one workout I came across was to superset a push/pull 8x8 3 times a week with minimal rest. Kind of a no brainer program. Might be something fun to try for 4-8 weeks?

No I have never tried a lever belt, are you having trouble tightening yours? I really crank mine down but my weight definitely changes the way mine fits. Usually mine is so tight it hurts to keep it on too long, which probably means im getting too fat...
 
I suspect its more of a stupidity factor. I guess ultra running doesn't attract many runners, let alone lifters. I ran across this site that listed people who have done 400/50. I think doing a 400dl/100 miler within the same time frame would be pretty impressive. Or a 400dl/300bp/100 miler?
What's the site? I'd like to take a look.

Cultivate your stupidity; it would be great if you could do the Half-ton Hundo, you could be the first! If you can do a 400DL and a 300BP, you should be able to pull off a 300SQ. (Man, I still can't believe how much I enjoy Squats these days, and my concept of using them to limit the Deadlifts seems to be working--everything feels pretty good these days.)

Here are some push pull ratings for 198
Respectable
275 BP
420 DL

Good
350 BP
520 DL

Great
400 BP
600 DL

Those correspond roughly to intermediate, advanced and elite on a lot of strength standard tables.

Yeah the drop sets seem like an intuitive way to lift when going for higher rep lifts. I might work that concept in there, it would also help the flow as I could probably have less rest in between sets.

I always used to do my bench that way, but starting with singles. Yesterday it worked well with the Overhead Press 3 x 8, going from 115>110>105. I'm not yet up to a really challenging Squat load (keeping the increases to five pound per week), so I just did sets across. Plus, I'm not sure if the squat is suitable for that sort of thing, we'll see.

I've read a little more into 8x8's, I too cannot believe that they made those extraordinary gains. I wonder if they all graded to less depth in the squat? I'm gonna follow up on that.
Anyway one workout I came across was to superset a push/pull 8x8 3 times a week with minimal rest. Kind of a no brainer program. Might be something fun to try for 4-8 weeks?

I dunno, I like my rest intervals, to maintain intensity. Seems like with minimal rest, or greater density, it starts to turn more into a conditioning program, rather than a pure strength program. Nothing wrong with that, but I'm holding off on the conditioning until I start to plateau in strength. 18-20 slow, controlled sets on the six lifts is about all I have in me right now. For you though, more of an emphasis on conditioning or stamina might help with the running and cycling, right?

Another thing with density training, or even speed training, it seems to me, is that it might lead to a degradation of form. As a Mike Bell video said, it's not only about getting stronger, but also better. I'm really enjoying working on my technique these days, especially the bench press, but also the rows. Once I'm able to do pullups, I'd like to really analyze the technique there too.

BTW, I ordered some wrist wraps to help teach me to keep the bar on the heel of my palm while pressing.

No I have never tried a lever belt, are you having trouble tightening yours? I really crank mine down but my weight definitely changes the way mine fits. Usually mine is so tight it hurts to keep it on too long, which probably means im getting too fat...

Yah, I realize how fat I am when I strap on the belt.

With the Spud 3-Ply belt, it's pretty easy to get the belt plenty tight. But I'm thinking long-term, it might best serve as a deadlift belt, although it's perfectly adequate as a squat belt, and I've been using it for the Overhead Press too. At some point though, I think I might want something stiffer for the squat, and my leather belt is a real bear to get on, just a hassle. I know it will soften with time, but the lever looks like it would be a lot easier. For the price of a case of Chillwave, I could get the Inzer Forever 10mm lever belt, and it comes in purple too, the Minnesota (Vikings and Prince) color.

Here's the best video I've seen on bench press form:
The arch doesn't seem super exaggerated, what do you (Abide & BA and anyone else) think?