starting strength gym
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 49

Thread: "TEXAS METHOD, not recommended for Inter"

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    10,199

    Default

    • starting strength seminar april 2024
    • starting strength seminar jume 2024
    • starting strength seminar august 2024
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Larousse View Post
    The only people i know of that made long term progress were Justin Lascek and that crew and I believe former poster and BJJ player Jared Dopp. I have never seen a log though so who knows.
    They didn't run TM proper- it was heavily modified and coached.

    [QUOTE=pshotsb17;1569001]Is there a controlled study on any program anywhere with a sample size large enough to be meaningful that shows that that program is superior to any other program?[QUOTE]

    Yes- though you have to do some mental gymnastics to look at the variants of DUP analyzed in the literature and the Nordic PL studies to see their average gains in their cohorts suggest the shortcomings I bring up in my article on the TM are, in fact, real.

    It is impossible to prove any program is better than any other unless we get 10000 identical humans and run them through identical programs in identical environments.
    No, it's really not. Say you have an expansive coaching practice and you get a couple hundred thousand exposures to training and subsequent results while pulling large amounts of somewhat controlled data continuously. You might run experiments of varying types over this time and see trends that guide further management based on the experimental evidence. You would not really need to control this stuff in a "training ward", rather you would do it in a free living environment like your subjects are located. This is what I do continuously.

    I really think programming is unique to every single person out there.
    I disagree. I think that there are a handful of cohorts that each person falls into and once identified, we can predict their outcomes based on the intervention. Sure, each cohort has a continuum of needs for stress, adaptation, and responses, but most folks fall into 1 of 4 different categories when it comes to responses to resistance training. This is also supported by evidence.

    All we know is stress creates a response and requires rest before re-stress.
    This is an oversimplification that is meaningless here.

    To create a rule for how much stress and how much recovery is really impossible to predict for anybody.
    Depends on what you mean by rule, but I feel very comfortable doing this daily.

    SSLP is the best thing we have, but beyond that, nada.
    Best thing who has?

    Everyone needs to figure it out on their own and stop paying for bullshit programs as though they were the secret to a bigger penis.
    It sounds like you may not understand how a group of people may, over a period of time, learn things and apply them. But I do have a program for a bigger penis. Link in bio.

    Quote Originally Posted by poser View Post
    Do you think that most of the SS intermediate models lack sufficient pulling volume?
    Yes.


    As time goes by, I increasingly find myself wondering if I shouldn't be doing more 3x3 type DL volume as opposed to the single top set model.
    That's unlikely to be enough either IMO.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    519

    Default

    What about the TM variants recommended in the "12 Ways to Skin The Texas Method" article as far as TM being suboptimal goes? I'm not sure if they are modified enough to be productive or if the article is not up to date with your current experiences.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jordan Feigenbaum View Post
    I think that there are a handful of cohorts that each person falls into and once identified, we can predict their outcomes based on the intervention. Sure, each cohort has a continuum of needs for stress, adaptation, and responses, but most folks fall into 1 of 4 different categories when it comes to responses to resistance training. This is also supported by evidence.
    Care to expound?

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    10,199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChasingCurls69 View Post
    What about the TM variants recommended in the "12 Ways to Skin The Texas Method" article as far as TM being suboptimal goes? I'm not sure if they are modified enough to be productive or if the article is not up to date with your current experiences.
    I wouldn't call those TM proper, which is the program I wouldn't recommend. I think they are suboptimal as far as being appropriate for an individual, but generally they're a good start IMO>

    Quote Originally Posted by coldfire View Post
    Care to expound?
    On what?

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    613

    Default

    My guess would be what those 4 different categories are, and what programming needs these categories would suggest be used. My personal hope is the four humors. I somehow doubt it though...

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jordan Feigenbaum View Post

    On what?
    Quote Originally Posted by Daverin View Post
    My guess would be what those 4 different categories are, and what programming needs these categories would suggest be used. My personal hope is the four humors. I somehow doubt it though...
    This.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    613

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coldfire View Post
    This.
    But were you also hoping for the Humors?

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daverin View Post
    But were you also hoping for the Humors?
    I still am

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    10,199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daverin View Post
    My guess would be what those 4 different categories are, and what programming needs these categories would suggest be used. My personal hope is the four humors. I somehow doubt it though...
    1) Low initial level of strength (untrained), poor response to training
    2) Low initial level of strength (untrained), robust response to training
    3) High initial level of strength (untrained), poor response to training
    4) High level of initial strength (untrained), high response to training

    The parameters adjusted are volume, intensity, exercise frequency, and cycle length. In general, the poor responders need more volume , frequency, and longer cycles. High responders can leverage a bit more intensity. Absolute amounts of each of these will vary between cohorts markedly, but within cohorts not as significantly.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    95

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    If an individual responds better to standard 3 day TM than HLM does that indicate a poor or robust response to training?

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •