starting strength gym
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 34

Thread: Requesting more clarification on beginner rep scheme

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    53,557

    Default

    • starting strength seminar april 2024
    • starting strength seminar jume 2024
    • starting strength seminar august 2024
    I find it difficult to believe that the crystalline clarity provided in PPST2 did not immediately make the blind see. What were they confused about?

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Orlando
    Posts
    2,933

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidl351 View Post
    Unfortunately, my argument was nearly verbatim page 79-80 when trying to explain my stance on the issue, but the other trainers weren't having it.
    ?
    Who cares what they think?

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    22

    Default

    The crux of their argument was that these people were so "horribly de-conditioned" and demonstrated such "horrendous posture" that barbell training should be one of the last things they do. They blasted barbell bench presses for these types of clients. They are a firm believer of the Bompa (not trying to pit any coaches against each other) dogma that higher reps would equate to quicker movement pattern learning. Because I don't have credentials like them, it didn't feel right for me to raise my voice and get irritated. What I found funny was that some of the trainers actually know you, claim they "know your modalities", yet still believe that 5 reps would be too heavy for the de-conditioned. I showed PPST2 to a few to explain that the clients will not be loading up 225lbs on the bar and crushing themselves, but only that I would observe proper technique and bar speed; they read it, scoffed, and gave it back to me and held firm to their original convictions. One trainer actually said, "in a perfect world where your clients can eat properly, rest properly, and not work 10-12 hours a day, then you could put his methods into practice". All of the trainers' programs are centered around time under tension, with some exercises instructing a 3 or 4 second eccentric... on a SQUAT. Again, these TUT are prescribed for the "horribly de-conditioned".

    I do appreciate your feedback. I was poking around to see if there is possibly a better explanation, or another way I can phrase proper novice programming to get through various thickness heads.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Atlanta area
    Posts
    4,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidl351 View Post
    Unfortunately, my argument was nearly verbatim page 79-80 when trying to explain my stance on the issue, but the other trainers weren't having it. As a matter of fact, I also used info from pages 95-96, and 102, and from the Starting Strength Wiki found from google.com, but to no avail. I'm sorry that you and others felt I didn't look up any of the info, I should have clarified in my original post that my best argument was from those pages.

    I guess when working with people who make at least 6 figures a year and don't place as much importance on a quality workout, all sound science goes through one ear and out the other.
    You should ask your fellow trainers who arge against you why they hold their religion to themselves so tightly - because without open-minded discussion, argument, and conjecture that's all they have: belief in something rather than knowledge.

    As for your 6-figure clients, the way I put it with mine is this: "You do "X," and are an expert at it. If I argued with you about "X," what would you think about me? It works the other way too. I don't have time to argue with you on my dime, and I don't have time to teach you without you paying me a WHOLE lot more money than you would for training."

    This, of course, is the luxury I have since I have another job, and the fact that almost my entire pool of potential clients (read: track cyclists) already know that I am a huge asshole. So YMMV. But if I were in your shoes, I'd have shot someone by now. Several someones in fact.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    605

    Default

    I personally would add that one of the reasons I liked SS when I started it was because of the 5 rep scheme. It's quick, makes it easy to maintain form while allowing you to make fast, and very measurable progress. It also means that an early stages SS workout, with short recovery times between sets, only takes around 45 minutes or so once you have the form down (which with a trainer shouldn't take too very long). It also is very easy psychologically to prep yourself for 5 reps, and for beginners it sometimes seems like the reps are done before they even start.

    If you want, you could even have them do 10 reps and 5 reps and see what they prefer. I'd bet 5 - especially when they realize that that means they can move more weight which is always satisfying.

    If they complain that it's not enough work, just have them wait a day till they're good and sore.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    433

    Default

    Probably the simplest explanation of why sets of 5s are good for novices (and just in general) is this: it's the rep range with the fewest downsides.

    Doing heavy low rep sets and moderate high rep sets have significant drawbacks. Fives are the best compromise.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    53,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidl351 View Post
    The crux of their argument was that these people were so "horribly de-conditioned" and demonstrated such "horrendous posture" that barbell training should be one of the last things they do. They blasted barbell bench presses for these types of clients. They are a firm believer of the Bompa (not trying to pit any coaches against each other) dogma that higher reps would equate to quicker movement pattern learning. Because I don't have credentials like them, it didn't feel right for me to raise my voice and get irritated. What I found funny was that some of the trainers actually know you, claim they "know your modalities", yet still believe that 5 reps would be too heavy for the de-conditioned. I showed PPST2 to a few to explain that the clients will not be loading up 225lbs on the bar and crushing themselves, but only that I would observe proper technique and bar speed; they read it, scoffed, and gave it back to me and held firm to their original convictions. One trainer actually said, "in a perfect world where your clients can eat properly, rest properly, and not work 10-12 hours a day, then you could put his methods into practice". All of the trainers' programs are centered around time under tension, with some exercises instructing a 3 or 4 second eccentric... on a SQUAT. Again, these TUT are prescribed for the "horribly de-conditioned".
    Posture and conditioning are a function of strength, in that muscles not strong enough to hold the skeleton together are also muscles with a very low work capacity. There is no system of training that produces faster gains in strength than 5s done with a numerically linear increase in weight using increments that can be adapted to over a 48-72 hour timeframe, as we have demonstrated that novices can do. This is just simple arithmetic. We use fives because of the reasons cited on pages 79-81. Also see fig. 5-3.

    "yet still believe that 5 reps would be too heavy for the de-conditioned" must be a typo. Reps are not heavy; weight is heavy. There obviously exists a weight for which 5 reps is not "too" heavy, as evidenced by the trainee's ability to complete 3 sets of 5 with this weight. Again, arithmetic rears its ugly head.

    And I think I'm stupid because it took me 6 attempts to pass Calc I.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Skander View Post
    I personally would add that one of the reasons I liked SS when I started it was because of the 5 rep scheme. It's quick, makes it easy to maintain form while allowing you to make fast, and very measurable progress. It also means that an early stages SS workout, with short recovery times between sets, only takes around 45 minutes or so once you have the form down (which with a trainer shouldn't take too very long). It also is very easy psychologically to prep yourself for 5 reps, and for beginners it sometimes seems like the reps are done before they even start.

    If you want, you could even have them do 10 reps and 5 reps and see what they prefer. I'd bet 5 - especially when they realize that that means they can move more weight which is always satisfying.

    If they complain that it's not enough work, just have them wait a day till they're good and sore.
    Thank you for the feedback. Unfortunately, my future clientele, judging from my observance here so far, will probably never prefer 5 reps for the sake of its benefits over 10 reps. You see, wealthy people in NY tend not to really care about exercise science as much because they can shell out the money for it. The drawback to that is, they feel that since they are paying "x" amount of money for the sessions, they should have almost full control of what they want to do to their bodies during the workout, regardless of if they know what they are talking about. A lot, and when I say a lot, I mean about 99% of them, want to feel the "burn" because that's what they read in Men's Health, or watch on TV.



    Quote Originally Posted by LimieJosh View Post
    ?
    Who cares what they think?
    Thank you for the feedback. However, I have to care about what they think: I'm an intern here. Although that may not hold much weight once I become a trainer, they expect me to adopt their training principles. After all, the gym here is well known for NOT having any strength guys, though there are a couple. And even they prefer not to train people for strength, only for money.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Posture and conditioning are a function of strength, in that muscles not strong enough to hold the skeleton together are also muscles with a very low work capacity. There is no system of training that produces faster gains in strength than 5s done with a numerically linear increase in weight using increments that can be adapted to over a 48-72 hour timeframe, as we have demonstrated that novices can do. This is just simple arithmetic. We use fives because of the reasons cited on pages 79-81. Also see fig. 5-3.

    "yet still believe that 5 reps would be too heavy for the de-conditioned" must be a typo. Reps are not heavy; weight is heavy. There obviously exists a weight for which 5 reps is not "too" heavy, as evidenced by the trainee's ability to complete 3 sets of 5 with this weight. Again, arithmetic rears its ugly head.

    And I think I'm stupid because it took me 6 attempts to pass Calc I.
    Mark, I totally agree. However, the trainers here believe that if someone has bad posture, closed chain kinetic exercises will not be doing them any favors and may make their postural deficiencies worse. There are some corrective exercise types here who only concentrate on fixing bad posture and "improving movement patterns" (whatever that may mean). Exercises like one-legged squats on an Airex pad is not an uncommon sight. Their justification is that clients need to learn how to coordinate their bodily movements before trying to handle an external load. What do I tell them? Stuff found in the book. I also tell them that some of these drills aren't going to make posture any better because they're not making the muscles any stronger, especially the ones supporting the body. What good does a one-legged squat do if the body never has to adapt to a true progressive overload? And honestly, how many times can I expect to see a person do anything remotely close to a one-legged squat with a 3 to 4 second eccentric outside of a gym? Probably never. I do think that some corrective exercises have their place: in teaching the body how to activate certain muscle groups so they can perform in conjunction with the body and to fine tune "weak links". However, I still find no substitute for a properly employed barbell training program. This program is in-and-of-itself reveals true weak links better than anything else.

    In regards to my typo, I apologize. I realize that heavy is completely relative. My counter-argument to their argument of, "beginners cannot handle an external load that they can lift for 5 reps!", is, "then it's my job to observe their form and bar speed; as soon as I see the bar speed slow down a little bit on the first day, it's been a good day."

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve in ATL View Post
    You should ask your fellow trainers who arge against you why they hold their religion to themselves so tightly - because without open-minded discussion, argument, and conjecture that's all they have: belief in something rather than knowledge.

    As for your 6-figure clients, the way I put it with mine is this: "You do "X," and are an expert at it. If I argued with you about "X," what would you think about me? It works the other way too. I don't have time to argue with you on my dime, and I don't have time to teach you without you paying me a WHOLE lot more money than you would for training."

    This, of course, is the luxury I have since I have another job, and the fact that almost my entire pool of potential clients (read: track cyclists) already know that I am a huge asshole. So YMMV. But if I were in your shoes, I'd have shot someone by now. Several someones in fact.
    The trainers recognize the fact that strength is the foundation to everything; it also defines the person. The thing they don't agree with is that beginners should be doing a rep scheme of 3 x 5, because of the overhead. Apparently, unbeknownst to me, bi-lateral work is more conducive to injuries that uni-lateral work! A lot of the more financially successful trainers here have gone to extremely pricey seminars -- Poliquin, Chek, Athlete's Performance. Even though they're all different in their own respects, none of them really address true beginners' rep schemes. Rather, they have a canopy principle to train EVERYONE. And that is the problem: the trainers here only go to seminars and learn things that reinforce what they're familiar with and what their clients want, not necessarily what they may need.

    I appreciate the advice, and trust me, telling clients what I expect of them will be something I'll be doing once I get neck deep in this industry. At the moment, however, I don't have that luxury. I feel I have to pay my dues initially as a trainer before I can start calling the shots, otherwise I won't have clients at all.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    53,557

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Quote Originally Posted by davidl351 View Post
    I feel I have to pay my dues initially as a trainer before I can start calling the shots, otherwise I won't have clients at all.
    A rather unusual market, NYC.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 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
  •