I'm confused about the Starr Model

[Jefferson]

Hi

I'm probably just dense but I don't understand what the Starr Model is. Is it the practice/technique of adding days to the Texas Method when you plateau and varying the sets/reps/exercises doesn't work anymore (as you possibly imply on page 130, last paragraph 4 line down)? Or is it a different program (as you possibly imply page 135, 6th line down)?

Both the Texas Method and the Starr Model seem to go in the order Light-Heavy Medium, and the sample workout at the back of the book of the Starr Model looks like the Texas Method with reps/sets/exercises varied as you suggested you do when initial progress stalls on the Texas Method.

So I'm just very confused as to how, if the Starr Model is a program of it's own, it is different to the Texas Method. Or if it's the practice of adding a day or of bumping the medium intensity day up to a heavy one to knock a bigger dent in homeostasis, how come there are only 3 training days which are light-heavy-medium same as the Texas Method in the Seamus Queevy sample workout?

I basically have no idea what the Starr Model is but you say you can get 2-3 years out of it 'more than the other two models' so I need to know what it is.

Thanks for answering this long and probably stupid question.

[Mark Rippetoe]

The Starr model adds training days to the three-day/week plan. Can you not discern the difference having read the intermediate chapter? Is table 7-1 somehow confusing to you?

[Jefferson]

The Starr model adds training days to the three-day/week plan. Can you not discern the difference having read the intermediate chapter? Is table 7-1 somehow confusing to you?

That's what I thought initially, I was confused by the sample Starr Model workout being the Texas Method with no added days, and by your distinguishing it from the 'other two models' which only makes sense grammatically if it too is type of workout routine, as opposed to simply being the practice of adding training days.

Thanks for clearing that up for me, everyone else probably understood that perfectly fine.

[Mark Rippetoe]

Sure.

[Jefferson]

Ok so just to make absolutely sure I'm understanding this right, if I get to the point with the Texas Method where variation isn't enough to stop me constantly plateauing, I just add a medium intensity day to the Texas Method and that's applying the Starr Model? The Starr Model isn't a different program that is distinguished from the Texas Method and the Split Model in that you can have days added to overcome plateaus?

[Mark Rippetoe]

You don't actually have the book, do you?

[OCG]

I suspect he is trying to learn programmeing via chinese whispers.

[Jay Mund]

Even if you were to just look at the sample workouts in the back of the book you should still be able to see that there are many differences between the Texas method and the Starr model. Reading the intermediate section again would probably be better though.

[Jefferson]

You don't actually have the book, do you?

Of course I do.

[Peter_k]

Huh? I think this thread is needlessly confusing lots of people.

I understood the Starr model to be just that - a model. Instead of organizing your training week as Volume/Light/Intensity (which is suited to 3-day routines), you organize it as Heavy/Medium/Light.

There's no reason why you couldn't use the "Starr model" in a three-day routine, nor could you describe it simply as "adding more training days." It's a way of organizing your training, whether it's over 3, 4, 5 or 6 days.

As far as I know, nobody does the TM 4-5 days a week because its loading parameters wouldn't work in such a set up. As such, it's best suited to people who have recently finished their linear progression and can still make some rapid gains on 3x week schedules.

Obviously, there's no point adding a fourth or fifth day if you're progressing nicely on three. But when you do need to add extra days, the Starr model is a good way to set up your routine.