So does the Texas method suck?

[brettj]

As you may have read above, Brett** (who's admittedly new to RPE), labelled lifts at a much higher RPE than they really should have been based on his prior numbers. For example, his 231x1 bench was 'assigned' an @8, whereas he was doing 245x4 on TM. This would probably make something closer to 250x1 @8, IMO. So if he were planning on a meet, he might undershoot his real max. Or if he's more apt to push himself, it may be the opposite.

As much as I love being discussed like this, I'm not sure I'm the best example to make your point.

1) I suck at RPE. Not only am I very new to it, but in my typical style I didn't really bother to read much into it other than a couple of articles and have been making it up from there.

2) There are other confounding factors that make comparing my previous lifts with my current ones difficult. I had a couple months layoff during which I started a new job, got married, travelled India, and lost 30 pounds. I haven't taken a very aggressive approach coming back either.

Not trying to defend my training style here; I enjoy fucking around and figuring things out myself, so I don't care as much about being "optimal". Just saying that I think I'm a very poor example to use in this discussion.

[Eric Larousse]

so why not add volume like the book says?^

one of the biggest causes of a lack of progress is to continuously program hop looking for the magic bullet

I am an admitted victim to this very thing with a lot of conflicting goals...literally trying to do everything and adjusting programming to make it fit my goals

if somebody wants to do Texas method they should do exactly that and make small adjustments to the program to make it work to the best of their ability....if they arent comfortable doing that for whatever reason they should hire a coach like Tom or Andy or somebody like that

I have it dead set in my mind that I am going to do the Texas method and that is what I should do. If I were to take all of this information in this thread about periodization, non linear, combos it would create a total clusterfuck in my mind coming up with something because the options and variations of programming is endless. This isnt to say that what Tom is saying here is bullshit. He is totally correct. Lets not forget though that Tom was a less experienced lifter like most of us at one point in his career but I think he probably learned a lot by doing what he would now call suboptimal programming and learning that there is a better way to do things. The point is if you set up a program for yourself that you believe in you do exactly that and let the chips fall where they may. If it fails you learn to make it better or you hire a Coach to program for you. I could easily do that but I want to learn for myself with the information I have from PPST3, articles, and just solid information on this forum thus creating my own journey in training.

That obviously doesnt apply to an very advanced lifter that is actually competitive in powerlifting at a high level but for the majority of us just lifting for better life quality are the programs in PPST really that bad? Someone who is going all out to be the best powerlifter of course those programs arent optimal but if it was that important to you than you would do whatever is necessary to be your strongest including hiring an expert programmer or learning yourself(both really). I dont think that really applies to the majority of recreational lifters on this forum but maybe im wrong? Most of us just want a program we can go in and do without thinking much and causing stress to ourselves. Going in and doing the same thing every time volume wise and intensity wise doesn't require much complexity other than a little adjustment here or there. It is as simple as go into the gym and do this and eat to progress.(add a little weight each run through or cycle)

If you want optimal programming that is going to require quite a bit of research and effort on your part if you are not already well versed in training theory etc.(which I am not) or hiring a good coach. Either PPST is bullshit or it isnt and there is only one way to find out.

[marcf]

Sure, it's easy to read your examples, see the numbers, and understand what the program consists of. The complicated part is comprehending the rationale behind the numbers. Obviously everything is moving from high volume/low intensity toward low volume/high intensity. But picking the actual sets x reps and weights/percentages is the part where don't know enough about how this all works to figure out how to apply it to myself. You wouldn't take someone straight from 3x5 LP and put them on a program where they're doing six sets every workout, would you? And how do you determine what percentage to start at on each day?

No one is saying this is rocket surgery but it's obvious that rotating rep ranges and adding 5lbs every time is "less complicated" because you are just making small modifications to what you've been doing (assuming you've followed the standard PPST novice-intermediate protocol thus far) rather than starting something totally new from scratch with weights and rep ranges that you're not familiar with.

I'm gonna take a crack at this and see if I've learned anything at all in the monster threads on the programming forum.

First, you absolutely can take someone who finishes 3x5 LP and have them do 6 sets of work. Why is that impossible? If their last top set on advanced novice was 350x5, it's totally possible to do 280 for 6x5, for example. It should be a walk in the park. What's the rationale behind the numbers for the programs? Smartly increasing work by manipulating volume, intensity and frequency. You wouldn't take someone who's finished the novice LP and suddenly quadruple their weekly volume. But once they've reached the end stages of their novice progression (whether you want to call that advanced novice, TM, etc.), they need more work to keep making meaningful gains, both in strength and size. The problem is that additional work can no longer be attained by linearly progressing because the intensities become too great, and has to be periodized.

It was either the "Squats becoming a grindfest" or "Umpteenth Bench Press Stall" threads that it was mentioned that there are minimum thresholds for intensity (i.e. you wouldn't want to program work sets at 50% 1RM), and minimum thresholds for volume per workout, per microcycle, per mesocycle (i.e. you can't spread your volume too thin, and you can't do it all in one day). This explains why these periodized programs often have work sets in the 70-80% range for half or more of the cycle, done one, two or more times per week depending on the lifter.

Now that you know the weight ranges you should be working in, you need to figure out how to get the work in without making sets a grind to failure or having it feel like a Butterfly On Your Back™. You wouldn't do 10 doubles at 68%, and you wouldn't do sets of 10 at 80%, either. For heavier weights, maybe you want to do 5x5, or 6x4, or 7x3, and for the lighter weights, you can do 4x6, 5x7, and so on until you hit your desired volume for the week.

As far as volume is concerned, you might want to trend upwards each week for a few weeks, moving from high volume/low intensity to high intensity/low volume, as you said, until you feel like it's the most you can do without regressing (probably maximum recoverable volume). Then take a deload week. Or if you're peaking for a meet, you cut volume and starting increasing intensity before you take a deload. If you keep a log with notes about how your training is going and how you're feeling session to session, week to week, you'll start to learn how you're responding to the volume you've programmed for yourself.

As far as frequency goes, you know that upper body movements (bench/press) generally can handle more frequency than lower body movements (squat/deadlift). You could probably bench 3-4x a week, but you probably couldn't do that with the deadlift. So you'd program your frequency for each lift in such a way that gives you the ability to recover some (not fully recover) from session to session. If you want exposure to heavier weights because you're getting close to a meet, you might decide to do a heavier session once a week, with one or two lighter sessions. If you're far from a meet or you want to build more muscle, you might stay at moderate weights in the higher rep ranges a few times a week.

I don't have it all figured out, and I probably got a few things wrong here, too. But the point is that it's not that hard to build somewhat of a base of information by being resourceful. Search the forums, look at the competitive lifter logs, search Google for powerlifting programs and try to figure out why things are written the way they are. Hell, ask strong ass lifters or pay for professional coaching. You've read PPST3, so if you come across a reputable program you should be able to get an idea of what's going on.

[kanahan]

Not directed at you, Eric. Just expressing a general sentiment of frustration. Everything besides SSLP and TM is considered "complicated" on this forum.

Dude, I don't think you realise it, but what you wrote down *is* incredibly complicated from the point of view of a lifter with a few months of lifting behind him, who just ended his LP, is still having form issues, probably doesn't have nutrition down 100%, and didn't spend every night reading programming books and forums. Hell I'm one of those geeky newbies that read half the posts ever on this forum (how many newbs do that? 1%) and actually did read PPST, and I found your programs a little confusing. I'm not sure I could put them into practice. If I hadn't run 5 months of TM/HLM and got that cycling rep experience I'm sure as hell I wouldn't have been able to.

Edit: nevermind, my point was made by other posters in a much better way.

[kanahan]

..

When you do, make sure you cycle both volume and intensity rep ranges as per the recent Andy article. This will look a lot like one of those "advanced" programs that Tom wrote above and he will be happy

[Charlie Davies]

Hah, I love how you keep calling me a novice, whereas my total was higher than yours with lower bodyweight, no wraps, no monolifts, no deadlift slippers, pure natty, taller and so on . I'm not claiming that makes me an expert in anything, but what's with the derogatory 'novices' comments?

Btw, usually on this forum "novice" is a compliment -- it means someone who is able to set new PRs multiple times per week. We all wish we were "novices" in this sense.

In a programming context, a "novice" doesn't need or want complex programs. They just go ahead being awesome, setting PRS, until that stops working.

A major problem for the SS community is the programming trainwreck that often hits people when novice phase ends. For people with this problem, threads like this are a goldmine.

[John Hanley]

I don't think there's anything intuitive or easy about about TM.

I do 5x5 for volume if I'm a healthy dude? 8x3 if female? 3x5 if old? Maybe 4x5? Just try try it, iterate through some failed weeks, tweak? So autoregulate, you mean?

I know I should increment my intensity squat set by 5# on Fridays, but the volume increment is what?
Whatever works? Or 5#? Or is volume always a fixed percentage of my previous ID? Why? Why not?

I feel like I'm stuck in circular reasoning hell: "TM is good because it's in a book written by trustworthy people. Trustworthy people put TM in a book 'cause it's good".

[Eric K]

I don't think there's anything intuitive or easy about about TM.

I do 5x5 for volume if I'm a healthy dude? 8x3 if female? 3x5 if old? Maybe 4x5? Just try try it, iterate through some failed weeks, tweak? So autoregulate, you mean?

I know I should increment my intensity squat set by 5# on Fridays, but the volume increment is what?
Whatever works? Or 5#? Or is volume always a fixed percentage of my previous ID? Why? Why not?

I feel like I'm stuck in circular reasoning hell: "TM is good because it's in a book written by trustworthy people. Trustworthy people put TM in a book 'cause it's good".

Well, just tweak it with different intensities and volumes until you find a periodi...uhh, progress happens. Just keep forcing it. Forcing it got Kobe Bryant laid, so it works.

[Bryan Dobson]

Force it until you break yourself or waste a couple of years.

It is hard to break the everyday weight on the bar is a sign of progression mindset. It worked so well at first so let's do more of it.

[Tim K]

In practice, people aren't actually consistently setting 5lbs PRs every three weeks. They're resetting and "running out" the TM multiple times for a year (or longer).

Most periodized, 12-16 Week programs, which DO NOT have to be "complicated", can be counted on to to produce 5-25lbs on your squat/deadlift

Well the book clearly states that "running it out" is only supposed to happen once and then you go to cycling rep ranges every three weeks. So if someone is running it out multiple times it seems they are trying to stretch it out past the point where it's useful, just like the guy that has been "doing SS" for a year and quit making progress long ago.

On the other hand assuming someone can still make 5lb PRs or better every three weeks by cycling rep ranges, that seems like what they should be doing just like someone who is still capable of making 5lb PRs weekly. I guess I don't understand why it makes sense that the SRA cycle jumps straight from 1 week to 12 weeks with nothing in between. Wouldn't it be better to slowly lengthen the training cycle by smaller amounts rather than jumping straight to a 12 week program that may only give you 5lb PR's? At least then you can see if it's working or not after 3 weeks instead of having to wait 3 months to evaluate your progress.

And BTW, I myself am not really talking about the Texas Method itself here, just the concept of rotating rep ranges over 3 weeks (or 4, 5, etc.) vs a standard 12 week periodization scheme. This can be equally applied to the heavy day on an HLM setup which is what I'm currently running and why I'm interested in this thread. Honestly I don't see how it's not just an abbreviated form of linear periodization anyway. You're still going from higher volume/lower intensity to lower volume/higher intensity, just over a shorter period of time. And it seems like that would be a good idea as long as it's still matched to the length of your SRA cycle (i.e. for someone who has just stopped being able to progress weekly).