So does the Texas method suck?

[Eric Larousse]

Glad you chimed in Tom. Thats fair. I completely understand what you are saying. That said to correct the problem of lack of hypertrophy work Rip has even said that a bodybuilding cycle could be useful for an intermediate(depending on anthropometry). The lack of assistance exercises in the parroted version of the TM has an easy solution though...add assistance exercises.

Andddd that said....you are likely right about it not being optimal and for me i am totally alright with that. I just like lifting heavy shit becauSe
1)it is a fun activity
2)it keeps me having a something pretty healthy to do
3)i look more impressive so i can score RPE 10 ladies

It isnt about optimal for me because i dont compete in a strength sport(not saying i wouldnt for fun) but thanks for the good lucks guys and good luck to you back in your endeavors

If it after a while i find out the shit just doesnt work you can all count on me to come right back here in this very thread and report the failings...no big deal

[Tom Narvaez]

If you add a hypertrophy block version of TM before the usual version of TM, guess what we would call that?

That's periodization. It works really well but now it's not a simple do the same thing every week kind of program. And i think that's what makes it attractive to people in the first place.

[kanahan]

Tom, there's extensive discussion of periodization in PPST. According to its writers, periodization isn't useful to people who just ended their LP. Are you saying that you think lifters just finishing their LP should move straight to periodization? Isn't a period of weekly progress, even lasting just a couple months, a faster way to progress for them?

[Tom Narvaez]

Didn't I just say that if you can still make weekly progress, even if for just a few months, that's exactly what you should be doing?

[Eric Larousse]

Periodization isnt useless even for a fresh new intermediate and i can attest this myself. I actually did the pyramid model for 2 cycles 6ish years ago. You will progress on it but its just a little slower than weekly of course.

[BBB]

Tom, there's extensive discussion of periodization in PPST. According to its writers, periodization isn't useful to people who just ended their LP. Are you saying that you think lifters just finishing their LP should move straight to periodization? Isn't a period of weekly progress, even lasting just a couple months, a faster way to progress for them?

No, he said do LP, then TM, but as soon as you start manipulating ID, switch to periodized programming instead.

Erik K nailed it.

Better question Eric, do you think Baker would put you on the Texas Method if you were paying him for coaching? What if you told him you wanted to get as strong as possible because you were a competitor? Do you think he'd give you the Texas Method? lol?

As simple as possible is good. No simpler, though.

Whenever people talk about programming, they make one HUGE error. They think people are talking about whether something "works" or whether something "does not work". That's an incredibly low level paradigm. The question isn't whether or not "something works". The question is whether or not the program is reasonably well suited to that particular individual's goals and the set of resources they are willing to commit to training. For a competitor, the question is not whether or not it works, it is whether or not it will work better than the other reasonable alternatives. The question becomes one of opportunity cost. You can only run one program at a time and running a sub-optimal one means you're sacrificing potential gains and possibly falling behind competitors. More simply, the question is more along the lines of: "Good, better, best". Compared to a bodybuilding magazine 5x8-12 program, the Texas Method is certainly a good program. Is it better than Sheiko, RTS, or other systems designed specifically for increasing strength in the Big Three? No, it isn't.

Can you fuck about and make progress for a year by cycling rep ranges on the Texas Method? Sure. Absolutely. Lots of people have done that. Check the training logs. However, as soon as your progress slows down to 5-10lbs per month on the squat, due to a combination of resets, slower progress in general, injuries, etc., the program isn't offering any advantages over any other basic periodized program. On top of having zero advantages in terms of rate of progression, it now introduces many problems that are relevant to a true intermediate lifter: 1) lack of secondary and accessory work to address weak points, 2) lack of hypertrophy based training to move the true intermediate lifter closer to their optimal level of muscularity for their height, 3) there is NEVER ANY manipulation of volume from week to week; you always run the exact same program over and over; volume doesn't/barely increase(s) overtime thus defying "overload" -- one of the core tenets of progress, 5) lack of general periodization / changing of training means to avoid repetitive use injuries, burnout, and general stagnation.

Saying the criticisms of TM are "bogus theories" is basically denying the last thirty years of literature on periodization. It is basically saying that periodization is unimportant. That's... asinine.

I'm not sure about Baker, but, yeah, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Rip probably hasn't been actively involved in the programming of many, many competitive powerlifters for a long time. I'm POSITIVE that is the case with Sullivan who probably can count all of his competitors on both hands. Why do you think guys like Jordan, Austin, etc., SSCs who actively compete themselves, run nothing like the Texas Method and don't really have favorable things to say about it as a whole? Why is that people who actually make their living off programming for others, and thus DEPEND on programs working well to retain clients and continue making money, do not like this program in general?

In any case, I don't need to convince you but I'll just settle for the rest of the people reading. Good luck with your TM journey.

Izzy, this is a very well thought out response. Unfortunately, you and many others, assume that everyone who lifts to get strong has aspirations to be a competitive powerlifter, as their primary and only goal. You've said it yourself, part of the appeal of TM is that it's simple. You get weekly feedback. You can manipulate variables to work on your strengths/weaknesses and you can even turn it into a periodized program if you want to. You can start cookie-cutter and end with a completely custom program based on the template.

You brought up Jordan, who just last month published an article about how the TM isn't an ideal program as written (on the interwebz). However, he did suggest a 'skinned' version as an alternative.

I'm definitely not arguing it's an ideal program for everyone, even you suggested it has its place. It's a tool and should be treated as such. No one tool is right for every job. Instead we should talk about pro's/con's and where each program fits in.

I've been wanting to switch to a different/periodized program for a long time, but "life" doesn't really allow it (or maybe I just haven't run into the right program to work within my constraints). If competing in powerlifting were a higher priority then I'd do it. Instead I compete just to see where I stand. It's Powerlifting to Have Fun/Stay Healthy/Be Strong vs. Powerlifting to Win

Case in point, I was just watching one of your video's about setting up a huge arch. I'm not sure if that's the way I want to improve my bench... I'll just give it more time and get stronger vs. reducing range of motion and get into some weird position (before you say it, I realize I can do both). Different priorities I guess?

[marcf]

I'm definitely not arguing it's an ideal program for everyone, even you suggested it has its place. It's a tool and should be treated as such. No one tool is right for every job. Instead we should talk about pro's/con's and where each program fits in.

I've been wanting to switch to a different/periodized program for a long time, but "life" doesn't really allow it (or maybe I just haven't run into the right program to work within my constraints). If competing in powerlifting were a higher priority then I'd do it. Instead I compete just to see where I stand. It's Powerlifting to Have Fun/Stay Healthy/Be Strong vs. Powerlifting to Win

I think that's why he stopped reviewing programs.

[Tom Narvaez]

TM is a not a great program to pick because of "life constraints". It is incredibly expensive in terms of recovery resources and yields low dividends nonetheless. My criticisms of TM stand independent of the fact that it isn't ideal for a competitor. This isn't like 5/3/1 where the program actually works extremely well for time efficiency and just generally working toward other goals. TM requires pretty much ALL of your physical resources to be dedicated towards the weight room and then still doesn't provide very good long term results. That's why it needs to be treated like the end of LP instead of a monolithic template that you run for 1+ year by cycling rep ranges etc.

[hamburgerfan]

And if a trainee does has the available resources to run TM, they should use those resources to run a different program that works better.

[Eric Larousse]

would you say the same thing about starting strength?^