So does the Texas method suck?

[BBB]

Volume tolerance is not a rapid on-set, permanent adaptation, BBB. It's really not. Otherwise every single person who ever ran Smolov would never again be able to run any other program and make gains. This obviously isn't the case. You can easily re-sensitize yourself to volume. Just like dieting, you get the best results with a cyclical approach. In fact, Layne has written an entire book on the importance of "reverse-dieting".

Got it!

You seem really determined to make RPE out to be something that no one can ever really true know is semi-accurate and all of us are trying to tell you that your inexperience is the only reason you feel this way. I know you seem to think that's an insult, but I promise you that within six months of just practicing rating RPE after your sets, conferring with video to adjust ratings, perhaps failing some sets or doing better than expected here and there (by using AMRAPs or rep ranges), you'd get the hang of it. You don't believe me and that's fine. You will in three years.

Hah! Well, to some degree it's true and even Mike T has mentioned it. It's a best guess.

I don't not believe you (double negative, hope you caught it)... I believe RPE is a powerful tool, what I'm saying is, as an intermediate, I can't relate to it yet. See my post above for more context.

[marcf]

Ok



The same would be true of any program. I can only do so much work in the time that I have. If I had more time, I'm sure my bench and DL would be better. I'd actually be able to rest/recover more/try more things/add more volume or accessories/switch to a 4-day split/etc. I'd definitely skin TM more were time less of a priority.



For anyone??

Bias in your dataset couldn't account for that?

Keep in mind the point I made earlier about psychology and feedback loop. Also keep in mind that a true intermediate (as defined by Rippetoe in his books) is still learning a lot. Is still able to set PR's (of some sort) on a weekly basis and so on. There's no need to complicate things until complications are needed and they can start with skinning the method.

One thing to keep in mind, just like in any other pursuit, when you get more advanced everything seems trivial to you. Everyone has to go through a certain learning curve. You can explain something to someone until you're blue in the face, but they won't get it because they can't relate (as evidenced by a few topics in this thread).

One of my hobbies is racing motorcycles. I can teach you extremely advanced techniques and they'll help you once you've reached a certain point, but until then, it's just theory I'm spewing that you can't apply and you may understand in theory, but can't really implement. You have to get there to get there. It takes time and a learning curve. In hindsight we all see the errors in our ways and how we could have improved - but that's only because we have the hindsight. Everyone learns/adapts/etc differently. I'm sure in time I'll join the same ranks that think TM is a 'terrible program,' but until then, I'm learning a lot about myself, my body, SRA, etc.

Different strokes I guess...

Ok, so let me see if this is an analogy that will work.

You race motorcycles. Great. Let's say you took Keith Code's racing school back in 2003, and he was telling you the best way to navigate a corner is to brake early, turn in very, very aggressively with a late entry, roll the throttle into the turn, and hit a late apex so that you can stand the bike up immediately instead of a gradual rise with slower speeds.

A few years later, you take Jason Pridmore's star school and he says, "No. If you do that, riders will pass you into the turn every single time. You need to learn to trail brake into the the turn. Whoever can brake the latest and still hit their lines will pass you more often than not."

But you're fighting and fighting and saying, "Well, Keith Code taught it to me this way, he's written numerous books, and he's been on two wheels since Pridmore was in diapers. My way has worked ok for me, not great, but I'm gonna keep doing it until I get better at it. I just haven't hit my stride yet." And somehow you keep telling yourself that as newer riders catch and pass you into the corners most of the time.

At that point, you're completely unwilling to experiment with a new way of doing things and you're blaming it on a lack of experience. You can't get the experience until you try the new thing. You can tell an older rider that advances in suspension and tire technology make it so much easier to stick to the ground without low-siding while trail braking, but to them it's just "a bunch of theory."

Stubbornly staying on TM and saying RPE is either a lie or unrelatable or too complex will always stay true for you because you're unwilling to give the other method a shot.

[Chris McCarthy]

I must admit I'm a bit confused here...my first session was a LONG time ago now but I'm pretty sure I started trying to figure out how hard a set was immediately and it's something I naturally refined in every single session since.

Except the ones where I was too drunk / stoned to notice, but I don't tend to mention them these days.

[Sean Herbison]

you don't understand your youth until it begins to slip away.

Right, John?

I don't think it is smart to train in a state of fatigue

Define "a state of fatigue" please. Because as I would define it, almost all lifting is done in a state of fatigue. The exception being, if you timed it right, a meet/test day.

Last edited by kanahan; Yesterday at 02:07 PM. Reason: I made a mockery but then decided it wasn't my place to do so.

Well done, kanahan.


Watch, I can read John's mind: Why Speed Work Doesn't Work - Mike Tuchscherer

[BBB]

Ok, so let me see if this is an analogy that will work.

You race motorcycles. Great. Let's say you took Keith Code's racing school back in 2003, and he was telling you the best way to navigate a corner is to brake early, turn in very, very aggressively with a late entry, roll the throttle into the turn, and hit a late apex so that you can stand the bike up immediately instead of a gradual rise with slower speeds.

A few years later, you take Jason Pridmore's star school and he says, "No. If you do that, riders will pass you into the turn every single time. You need to learn to trail brake into the the turn. Whoever can brake the latest and still hit their lines will pass you more often than not."

But you're fighting and fighting and saying, "Well, Keith Code taught it to me this way, he's written numerous books, and he's been on two wheels since Pridmore was in diapers. My way has worked ok for me, not great, but I'm gonna keep doing it until I get better at it. I just haven't hit my stride yet." And somehow you keep telling yourself that as newer riders catch and pass you into the corners most of the time.

At that point, you're completely unwilling to experiment with a new way of doing things and you're blaming it on a lack of experience. You can't get the experience until you try the new thing. You can tell an older rider that advances in suspension and tire technology make it so much easier to stick to the ground without low-siding while trail braking, but to them it's just "a bunch of theory."

Stubbornly staying on TM and saying RPE is either a lie or unrelatable or too complex will always stay true for you because you're unwilling to give the other method a shot.

Hah, great example, I can work with this Are you also a fellow enthusiast?

Ok, so on to your example.

You’ve discovered track riding, someone suggests a book by Keith Code to help you on your journey. You get a book learn about SR’s (Survival Reactions), learn about braking into a corner, setting up for that corner and driving out with positive throttle, ratcheting and so on. You’re maybe a year or two into riding on the track learning the limits of braking straight up/down, maximizing corner speed, etc. Your aspirations aren’t to be Rossi, but to enjoy getting better/faster nonetheless.

You sign up to a forum of fellow enthusiasts and someone named Jason Pridmore is tell you if you want to get faster in a shorter amount of time, just drop that Keith Code nonsense and start learning to trail brake, NOW. Code may have successfully taught thousands of people via his book, but they're not as fast as me. You ask questions such as how do you know where the limit is for your level of skill, bike setup, suspension setup or tire and he says "you’ll feel it after you’ve done it enough. We’ve been riding for all these years and we know where it is, so naturally you’ll learn it too."

Now keep in mind, Pridmore may be right, but he’s not coaching you, he’s not monitoring your progress and he may not realize how many other non-experts are reading his advice and heeding it just because he’s a supposed expert. It may be great advice for some people and not others. People with limited riding experience can’t implement it for many reasons. Maybe as the years go by and they get more track sessions under their belt they’ll remember "Hey, I have a good feel for my front end and I remember Pridmore saying something about trail braking hard into that corner. Let push a bit harder than I used to, start connecting the dots that I've learned and seeing how much faster I can get."

[Adam Nelson]

If only you'd quit screwing around and finish your Irony Algorithm, this whole mess could've been avoided...

[George Christiansen]

First of all, unless you're a competitive athlete (I know Izzy is competitive), then you (the plural you) should be looking at the long term.

Of course, but the long term of more progress per cycle/week/whatever is more progress in the long term. Also ya'll (the proper plural you) have a limited amount of time to make progress before you are just fighting off decay. I'd like to have a decent amount of "savings" before that happens.

You seem to be picturing this as the tortoise and the hare, but it isn't like that. There is a third character that doesn't go as dumb ass fast as the hare and have to quit, but also, not only beats the turtle to the original finish line, but covers more distance beyond that point before the tortoise even crosses the finish line. The winner covers the longest distance (most progress) not covers the course the fastest (hit some arbitrary numbers first).

Of course being noncompetitive or just more spread thin will put constraints on how much you can invest, but the idea is to make the most return on the time and energy investment that you have available.

Like I said, I basically have 4-5 hours 3-4 days a week to invest. By your thinking I should cut that to 2 hours spread acrooss 2 days because I would still make some progress, but that is just dumb unless it is because of a genuine lack of interest or outside constraints. Even worse though would be to continue using up all of the time I have available, but use programming with a lower return on that investment.

You can only get so strong so fast and build muscle so fast.

Nobody is arguing otherwise. I am just arguing for the fasted possible route within the constraints that I have.

Doing a ton of volume, letting your body adapt and then not being able to throw more volume at the problem is no different than over-dieting.

No. These are completely different. Dieting too much fucks you out of gains. Using the most possible volume, in the right context, gets you the best results possible...and as soon as you hit peak volume you either head the other way while adding intensity or you deload and then become volume sensitive once again...except maybe now your upper volume limit is even higher, although there is an ultimate cap that is usually set by other restraints anyway.

[marcf]

Hah, great example, I can work with this Are you also a fellow enthusiast?

Ok, so on to your example.

You’ve discovered track riding, someone suggests a book by Keith Code to help you on your journey. You get a book learn about SR’s (Survival Reactions), learn about braking into a corner, setting up for that corner and driving out with positive throttle, ratcheting and so on. You’re maybe a year or two into riding on the track learning the limits of braking straight up/down, maximizing corner speed, etc. Your aspirations aren’t to be Rossi, but to enjoy getting better/faster nonetheless.

You sign up to a forum of fellow enthusiasts and someone named Jason Pridmore is tell you if you want to get faster in a shorter amount of time, just drop that Keith Code nonsense and start learning to trail brake, NOW. Code may have successfully taught thousands of people via his book, but they're not as fast as me. You ask questions such as how do you know where the limit is for your level of skill, bike setup, suspension setup or tire and he says "you’ll feel it after you’ve done it enough. We’ve been riding for all these years and we know where it is, so naturally you’ll learn it too."

Now keep in mind, Pridmore may be right, but he’s not coaching you, he’s not monitoring your progress and he may not realize how many other non-experts are reading his advice and heeding it just because he’s a supposed expert. It may be great advice for some people and not others. People with limited riding experience can’t implement it for many reasons. Maybe as the years go by and they get more track sessions under their belt they’ll remember "Hey, I have a good feel for my front end and I remember Pridmore saying something about trail braking hard into that corner. Let push a bit harder than I used to, start connecting the dots that I've learned and seeing how much faster I can get."

Pridmore isn't coaching or monitoring you, but you have the good people of the forums who would watch your videos and follow your log--folks who can offer experienced insight. For free!

If you're ever in SoCal, let's ride.

[SJB]

I am an ordained Texas Methodist minister.

For best results, honestly, I'd just swap them out for Pendlay rows.

So only do Pedantic Hoes and only biweekly @11, is that what you are saying? I don't want to misunderstand.

[Meshuggah]

I wouldn't totally dismiss speed work. Eddie Hall alternated heavy weeks with speed weeks to deadlift 500 KG.
And yes, the Texas Method is Garbage.