SS For Individuals Who Already Has Good Barbell Training Base but with Novice Stats.

[Christopher Anderson]

Why are people always in such a rush to skip the first step?

[Mugaaz]

Also out of curiosity, what do you think is the risk of prescribing numbers to novice programming? I do believe there are certain squat numbers that would be applicable to about 80% of the training population and I think it would prevent a lot of people from moving to intermediate programming too early. I think that was my biggest mistake in my strength journey. As a novice, I really had no perception of what I should of been possible and I cut my novice progression off too early.

Because there are some extreme outliers. More importantly, because assigning numbers to the novice/intermediate/adv stage is just plain false and easily disprovable.

[Sean Herbison]

have I wasted my novice capabilities of adapting on a training to training basis?

You can't really "waste" your novice capabilities. It's not like doing sub-optimal programming will someone lower your genetic abilities. You can definitely waste time, but if you start a linear progression after fiddling around for a while, you're not going to ruin your progression.

As a novice, you have no perception of fatigue.

That's not true. It might not be very accurate, but there's still definitely a perception.

I do believe there are certain squat numbers that would be applicable to about 80% of the training population

Not really, no. That's why those "strength charts" are so annoying. Someone will see that they're "advanced" in a lift, and think they need special programming. No, you just happen to be naturally strong there. You've only been lifting for a month and can already squat 400? Great, try 405 next time, instead of looking at a number on a chart and thinking an LP can't work anymore.

[I_iz_a_fatass]

Why are people always in such a rush to skip the first step?

"Novice" has the connotation that a lifter doesn't know what they're doing, rather than the SS definition that it's about their potential to progress with weight on the bar. Nobody - especially someone who's trained for years - wants to admit their programming wasn't as smart as it should have been.

I started with my own SS bastardization, got "kinda sorta strong", got massively ill, hopped on SS as part of recovery with a hard reset, and made massive gains faster than I thought possible. It was humbling to see how much I left on the table, so to speak.

[Diddyin94]

Not really, no. That's why those "strength charts" are so annoying. Someone will see that they're "advanced" in a lift, and think they need special programming. No, you just happen to be naturally strong there. You've only been lifting for a month and can already squat 400? Great, try 405 next time, instead of looking at a number on a chart and thinking an LP can't work anymore.

I am absolutely certain that 80% of the population will not walk into the gym and squat 400. Why do we continually keep referencing this? I believe Dr. Baraki referenced in the last Q&A that when he added the 4th plate to his squat he was one of the only people in the gym who could do this. I bet I could spend about 10 minutes going through the training logs and find a lot of people who more than likely ended their LP early and moved to intermediate programming when it was unnecessary. I am saying providing a context that novices should not end their LP at 275 because 80% of them could get further would be helpful.

[Sean Herbison]

I am absolutely certain that 80% of the population will not walk into the gym and squat 400.

Obviously very few people will squat 400 with minimal training. I just chose a number to illustrate the point, the specific number wasn't important.

I am saying providing a context that novices should not end their LP at 275 because 80% of them could get further would be helpful.

What you're asking for already exists, from multiple sources. Pictured below is the one Rip and co. put out over a decade ago, and it's been more of a hindrance than a help. If you care to search for them, there are plenty of threads where a 150 lb guy comes in with a 200 lb bench after training for a short period of time, and then asks what modifications he should make since he's already between intermediate and advanced.

Rather than using these charts as a general guideline, and realizing that everybody's numbers will be different based on their own relative strengths and weaknesses, people tried to turn them into a basis for their programming. Rip eventually got sick of it and took them down, but once they're out there, they're out there for good, so we still see occasional questions on them.

[Diddyin94]

Thanks for this Sean. I do have some questions about this though, for instance 181lbs and the squat, is 269 really a "good" LP? I feel like that seems low for what most trainees are capable of, no?

I look back on my own training experience and I stopped my LP at probably 300 if I can recall, but I think if someone would of told me 350 is a realistic number for someone who was 181 I would of really pushed myself to get to that number. Even if I didn't get that number, I think I would of landed at higher than 300 before switching. But hey hindsight is 20/20, right?

[Mugaaz]

Thanks for this Sean. I do have some questions about this though, for instance 181lbs and the squat, is 269 really a "good" LP? I feel like that seems low for what most trainees are capable of, no?

I look back on my own training experience and I stopped my LP at probably 300 if I can recall, but I think if someone would of told me 350 is a realistic number for someone who was 181 I would of really pushed myself to get to that number. Even if I didn't get that number, I think I would of landed at higher than 300 before switching. But hey hindsight is 20/20, right?

Your argument makes no sense. You stopped your LP because you thought it was "good"? Why would you stop your LP for that reason? You are supposed stop your LP because you fail at continuing your linear progression. It doesn't matter if its good or not. Your comment is EXACTLY why the chart sucks. People using the chart to decide what is "good LP" or "realistic" or if they are a novice or intermediate is not what it is supposed to be used for.

[Diddyin94]

That's not what I said at all. Where did I say that I stopped my LP because I thought that was good? I stopped my LP because I kept failing workouts. I asked if 269 was a "good" LP and what most trainees are capable of. Two very different things. We see people on this forum all the time that say "I am stalling out at 205 for my squat" and without much more information we know for a fact that they have not exhausted their LP. We also see people who go to 430 for their SSLP and we know that this is not typical for most trainees. I am saying that a number exists and I am saying that most people probably underestimate it.

As an intermediate, I had a much better idea of what sort of intensity and volume my body responds to, how to deal with bad workouts, and when to take a deload/reset. Not having a coach and being new to training makes it difficult for a novice trainee to navigate the transition from novice to intermediate.

[Leah Lutz]

That's not what I said at all. Where did I say that I stopped my LP because I thought that was good? I stopped my LP because I kept failing workouts. I asked if 269 was a "good" LP and what most trainees are capable of. Two very different things. We see people on this forum all the time that say "I am stalling out at 205 for my squat" and without much more information we know for a fact that they have not exhausted their LP. We also see people who go to 430 for their SSLP and we know that this is not typical for most trainees. I am saying that a number exists and I am saying that most people probably underestimate it.

As an intermediate, I had a much better idea of what sort of intensity and volume my body responds to, how to deal with bad workouts, and when to take a deload/reset. Not having a coach and being new to training makes it difficult for a novice trainee to navigate the transition from novice to intermediate.

I don't understand what benefit you think there is in defining a "good" LP with a number. How in the world would you define a good number that would cross all of our general training populations? Remember to factor in training history, age, sex, training environment, coaching, stress, and more. A solid LP is one in which you follow the program, eat well, sleep, don't do a bunch of silly extra work, and learn to push yourself to do more than you thought you could do. Do you see how there are an awful lot of variables there?

And I agree that the transition from novice to intermediate programming can be tough, but that's a different point.