Hello there,

Quite some time passed till my last post.

During the time i trained the HLM format twice a week. After stalling i took some ideas from casey butt and included them in my training.

I am always curious to learn sth new, i found this article a intersting read:
http://www.gustrength.com/eric-troy:the-failure-of-intensity-cycling

Look up the forum and articles. Another nice one is this here:
http://www.gustrength.com/training:single-double-triple-progression

Currently i run this format:

A: deadlift
bench
row
crunch

B:
squat
military press
chin up

quite basic and i like the set up. I use the SDT progression (look the article up i posted above) for it.

This GU site is interesting and quite different than other forums. They guys take care a lot about specifity. they are also kind of phliosphic regarding training- not really in a training theoretical sense like on this site (which i like more) but more regarding attitudes and they habe a great hate on the cookie cutter programms and the fitness industrie.

Interesting experience.

check it out!

I read the first article but really can’t understand the stand of author.
He don’t believes in intensity cycling but what the he recommends instead?

hey anatoly=)
well a deload in volume.

the main template they follow starts with a BV (base volume) like 2x4. you increase the volume with reps or sets (whats possible)each session . then when you can´t hold it anymore you decrease the volume to 2x4 again and raise the weight.(deload/intensification) Then you start new.

Understood.
But what about soft tissues rest? You work in low reps high weight range all the time, and don’t let them to rest.

what u mean by soft tissue rest?

joints and tendons

ah ok.

thats a point for sure.

the problem seems to be, that the weight is the main adaption cue for the body. Thats why also stone(2003)recommends a deload and taper, where the intensity is maintained or raised but the volume sharply dropped.

BTW how does your training go? I have seen you increased your working weights by simultan dropping a bit of your own (fat)weight. Well done Anatoly.

flow - 18 May 2011 12:33 PM

ah ok.
BTW how does your training go? I have seen you increased your working weights by simultan dropping a bit of your own (fat)weight. Well done Anatoly.

I’m fine, thank you. Simplicity is key after all.

Well or simplicity in complexity;)

Hey Anatoly do u got a hint for me?

I tried this SDT (which basically means to progress each time in the gym be it sets reps or weight) stuff with the template above.I started with my 2x6RPM. Squats and deads go well-but as u know i never did the consistently so everything will work for them.

Regarding the other exercises: row also worked, but on the other exercises i am only able to ad sets not reps. Here i also got the impression that i don´t adapt to the load. Even when adding a set more each week it was damn hard to do that and i didn´t have the impression that i adapted to the load.

Here i thing that perhaps frequency is an issue. benching once a week is not much.

Here i thought of doing the A and B they on one day togther 2x the week, starting with one set. Like one set with 8 reps with my 8rpm.
If i get more reps next session fine,if not i add a set. next time i try to improve the reps only on the second set. if that doens´t work (anymore) i add another set with the maximum reps psossible.then next time i only try to improve the reps on the 3rd set and so on.

The purpose is, to apply more workload to the body until a sweet spot occurs where i am able to ad reps. Only trying to ad reps to one set has the sense that not each set is taken to failure.

I think that 2 sets of 8 reps is very low volume. You might think on workout more frequent if you use so low volume.

well i thought of starting with my 8rpm for one set of 8 twice the week.
If i don´t PR i will increase by a set, but only trying to add reps in the second set the next time.

And so on.The sets are maintained until i can´t increase the reps on the last set. then i add one.

The purpose is, to apply more workload to the body until a sweet spot occurs where i am able to ad reps. Only trying to ad reps to one set has the sense that not each set is taken to failure.

What do u think of the idea?

Well, it very close to something that Matt Perriman says years ago

o me it could just be as simple as this:

Phase 1, volume/accumulation emphasis

Pick a starting weight, we can use the arbitrary 200 lbs here. First workout, you hit whatever as a baseline - 1x10, 2x5, 5x3, whatever. That’s your starting point.

Progression from there would be a matter of bumping the tonnage with that weight. So you’d add more sets, more reps, whatever, as long as the volume-load/tonnage goes up.

Tuch’s RPE stuff would fit nicely here because you can gauge your relative strength by RPE. If 200 for 5x3 was a 9 last week and this week it’s an 8, you can be pretty sure you’ve gotten stronger.

Once that runs out of steam, because you’re going to hit a practical limit sooner or later, you’d hit the second phase

Phase 2, intensity/intensification emphasis

Here you just pick a stable volume and ramp the loading. No different from your usual 5x5 or whatever. Get a static set/rep scheme and just go to town to ramp the weight up 5-10 lbs each week.

Anatoly - 19 May 2011 10:48 AM

Well, it very close to something that Matt Perriman says years ago

o me it could just be as simple as this:

Phase 1, volume/accumulation emphasis

Pick a starting weight, we can use the arbitrary 200 lbs here. First workout, you hit whatever as a baseline - 1x10, 2x5, 5x3, whatever. That’s your starting point.

Progression from there would be a matter of bumping the tonnage with that weight. So you’d add more sets, more reps, whatever, as long as the volume-load/tonnage goes up.

Tuch’s RPE stuff would fit nicely here because you can gauge your relative strength by RPE. If 200 for 5x3 was a 9 last week and this week it’s an 8, you can be pretty sure you’ve gotten stronger.

Once that runs out of steam, because you’re going to hit a practical limit sooner or later, you’d hit the second phase

Phase 2, intensity/intensification emphasis

Here you just pick a stable volume and ramp the loading. No different from your usual 5x5 or whatever. Get a static set/rep scheme and just go to town to ramp the weight up 5-10 lbs each week.

wow great. thank you anatoly, exactly what i want to try and thought of.

have u ever tried it? that sounds simple and great. Need this to be adapted to a HLM scheme, or can it be done as simple as that?

flow - 19 May 2011 03:45 PM

wow great. thank you anatoly, exactly what i want to try and thought of.

have u ever tried it?

No.

flow - 19 May 2011 03:45 PM

Need this to be adapted to a HLM scheme, or can it be done as simple as that?

Have no idea. I think that hole idea of accumulation phase is…. well, “accumulate” fatigue. If so HLM scheme not so appropriate here.

well thats sound.

great i will give it a go.

thx anatoly

flow - 17 May 2011 05:29 PM

hey anatoly=)

the main template they follow starts with a BV (base volume) like 2x4. you increase the volume with reps or sets (whats possible)each session . then when you can´t hold it anymore you decrease the volume to 2x4 again and raise the weight.(deload/intensification) Then you start new.

This is not true. We do not follow this template because SDT is not a template, but a tool to be used within a template. And yes, 2x4 would be a low volume much of the time. SDT is best used after establishing a base volume some other way on a particular exercise, rather than just pulling it out of a hat. Otherwise something like 3x5 to 6 would be a more realistic base, in general terms. A specific example of 2x5 was given by one of the members in a blog post but that was an example not a rule. Just wanted to clear that up.

We very seldom use SDT on the main lifts. It is usually used as a way of gathering volume on secondary exercises. When it is used with main lifts it is part of a broader plan where we are building on an established range to build up work tolerance, for example. It was never meant as a program and was never represented as such. Just wanted to clear this up.