I don't want to compete, I just want to be strong.

[Adam Skillin]

Just saw this link in my blog traffic. Very cool to be mentioned here.

I understand the opinions expressed here, and that's something that I feel gets lost in the land of the internet: most things are opinions. My blog is just that as well, and these are the things I've learned in my own training. I've competed in both powerlifting and strongman, and enjoyed both a great deal, but whenever I don't have a competition looming, I tend to gravitate more toward the lifts mentioned in order to continue getting bigger and stronger. I understand the sentiment expressed that the barbell lifts are far more available, and that's a compelling reason, but I don't spend my money on much else, so I have a lot of toys in my garage, haha.

Mark: Thanks for the response. I still have a copy of "Mean Ol Mr. Gravity" in my bathroom which I page through whenever I'm in for a long trip. Even if I don't agree with you exactly on certain things, I find that I always tend to agree with your mentality, which I find is probably the element of training MOST vital to success.

You're certainly free to utilize whatever exercises, movements, and toys you most enjoy. The question is not whether you've managed to increase your own size and strength through these specific movements, but whether the lesson applies generally. I doubt you'd argue that lots of people over the years have managed to get very big and strong through the squat, the bench press, the deadlift, (the press, chin-ups, power cleans). But we're not making claims based on just that empirical evidence. We utilize exercises selected through an analysis of what best fits the list of criteria mentioned above, that they lift uses the most muscle mass over the longest effective ROM to move the most weight and hence make us stronger. The exercises we use here clearly fit those criteria better than your personal favorites. Do you have a different set of criteria or a different analysis of the relevant selection criteria? Or are you just talking about what you personally like and have had success with?

[MiddleMike]

So let's see OP, you want to be strong but not compete... Sounds like you are ready for "Starting Strength." As a newbie to lifting with lots of life priorities, competition is not a goal, but getting as strong as I can sure is. Upon reading SSBT, you'll quickly find gaining strength presented in a fairly simple formula, but like most things, it is hard work. There are no short cuts...so stop looking and get under the bar.

[MythicalStrength]

You're certainly free to utilize whatever exercises, movements, and toys you most enjoy. The question is not whether you've managed to increase your own size and strength through these specific movements, but whether the lesson applies generally. I doubt you'd argue that lots of people over the years have managed to get very big and strong through the squat, the bench press, the deadlift, (the press, chin-ups, power cleans). But we're not making claims based on just that empirical evidence. We utilize exercises selected through an analysis of what best fits the list of criteria mentioned above, that they lift uses the most muscle mass over the longest effective ROM to move the most weight and hence make us stronger. The exercises we use here clearly fit those criteria better than your personal favorites. Do you have a different set of criteria or a different analysis of the relevant selection criteria? Or are you just talking about what you personally like and have had success with?

I always speak only of my own experiences, as I feel that to do otherwise would be presumptuous. When I have trained beginners, I have used the movements mentioned here as well to great effect in the goal of getting bigger and stronger, so I find them useful.

If someone does not agree with my preferences, I do not take offense to it. There are a lot of ways to get bigger and stronger. For me, these are the movements that I have found most effective in my pursuit, and I freely share them with any who care to listen. If people don't want to, that's cool too.

[Bill Been]

I feel like we should all come together, jointly, as-one, realizing our oneness, embracing it, realizing the serendipity of our simultaneous arrivals at this arbitrary point in space-time. Then we can all go to Sedona and have our chakras realigned, our crystals recharged, and maybe meet with a spiritualist and have hot cocoa.

[Adam Skillin]

I always speak only of my own experiences, as I feel that to do otherwise would be presumptuous. When I have trained beginners, I have used the movements mentioned here as well to great effect in the goal of getting bigger and stronger, so I find them useful.

If someone does not agree with my preferences, I do not take offense to it. There are a lot of ways to get bigger and stronger. For me, these are the movements that I have found most effective in my pursuit, and I freely share them with any who care to listen. If people don't want to, that's cool too.

And all of that is your personal prerogative. But it doesn't answer my question. Why should the exercises you advocate be equal to or better than the ones used in the Starting Strength program for getting strong? In other words, what relevant criteria do they meet as well or better than the squat, the deadlift, and the bench press?

I understand that you may not have thought through this. But that's not how we approach exercise selection around here. Without any analysis as to why they could work as well or better than the "big 3," to counter the analysis that we've utilized in order to select our exercises, there's not really any productive discussion to be had.

I think it's fair to say that we've got both the vast weight of the majority of the existing empirical evidence and analysis on our side here. If your personal experiences differ, it would be interesting to talk about why that could be, but you don't seem interested in that discussion.

[MythicalStrength]

And all of that is your personal prerogative. But it doesn't answer my question. Why should the exercises you advocate be equal to or better than the ones used in the Starting Strength program for getting strong? In other words, what relevant criteria do they meet as well or better than the squat, the deadlift, and the bench press?

I understand that you may not have thought through this. But that's not how we approach exercise selection around here. Without any analysis as to why they could work as well or better than the "big 3," to counter the analysis that we've utilized in order to select our exercises, there's not really any productive discussion to be had.

I think it's fair to say that we've got both the vast weight of the majority of the existing empirical evidence and analysis on our side here. If your personal experiences differ, it would be interesting to talk about why that could be, but you don't seem interested in that discussion.

I get bigger and stronger when I use them than when I use the barbell squat, bench press and deadlift. It's why I find them more effective movements for me.

You say "how we approach exercise selection around here", but I am not telling people here how to select their exercises. Again, that would be silly of me to do so, as I can only speak on my own experiences.

You will have to excuse me, but I do not believe productive discussion on this matter CAN be had honestly. I am a firm believer in the idea that no person ever willingly engages in a debate for the sake of having their OWN view changed, but purely for the sake of changing the other persons. I've been on the internet long enough to know that the pursuit is of no merit to either party, and instead simply share my experiences on my blog for others to decide if they want to use them. As long as everyone involved is getting bigger and stronger, I don't really see the problem.

[Sean Herbison]

I understand the opinions expressed here, and that's something that I feel gets lost in the land of the internet: most things are opinions.

To an extent, true. I haven't read your blog with more than a casual glance through, so if you answer this somewhere just point me to the link: what leads you to believe those exercises are better for general strength? What's your model behind it?

Not trying to bash you, just trying to see your evidence and reasoning, basically.

[Adam Skillin]

I do not believe productive discussion on this matter CAN be had honestly. I am a firm believer in the idea that no person ever willingly engages in a debate for the sake of having their OWN view changed, but purely for the sake of changing the other persons.

I disagree with this. I give advice on these boards to hone my skills on doing so, but I enter into debates to learn where there might be holes in my own knowledge and/or understanding. I regularly learn from people who I disagree with, even on occasions when I end up still disagreeing with them.

[Sean Herbison]

You say "how we approach exercise selection around here", but I am not telling people here how to select their exercises. Again, that would be silly of me to do so, as I can only speak on my own experiences.

While there will always be individual variations in a totally optimal program, there are still general guidelines that work. If you speak of your own experiences in a way that suggests your method works better, people will want to know why, even if you didn't mean it that way, as evidenced by the first post in this thread.

You will have to excuse me, but I do not believe productive discussion on this matter CAN be had honestly. I am a firm believer in the idea that no person ever willingly engages in a debate for the sake of having their OWN view changed, but purely for the sake of changing the other persons.

While I think this is generally true, I can't agree that "no person ever" has that mindset. I did. I really didn't get the point of Rip's "jump and catch" method for teaching the clean, and it was one of the things I went to the seminar hoping to be convinced of. Turns out I agree with him now.

Since Rip is a much better coach than I am, I recognize that he's generally going to be right when we disagree. I then try to figure out what I'm missing to not share his view. Is Rip the best coach out there, and right about everything? Probably not, but he communicates well, and gives thorough reasoning behind most of his lifting decisions.

As long as everyone involved is getting bigger and stronger, I don't really see the problem.

True to an extent. But if you can do the process better, assuming it doesn't ruin your fun (if that's important to you), why not? Lots of things work somewhat, but that doesn't mean they're worth doing when there are better alternatives.

[Kyle Schuant]

no person ever willingly engages in a debate for the sake of having their OWN view changed, but purely for the sake of changing the other persons.

That's the difference between a debate and a discussion.

I can't speak for your little corner of the internet, but here people have become more open to different approaches than they used to. The other day I was looking at the Greyskull book, the guy was saying how he was on a forum and his ideas weren't accepted, he didn't name the place but it sounded like this one. His ideas were many, but one of them was, when you stall, dropping back and building up again in endless cycles is depressing, more fun is - last set, do as many reps as you can. So even if you can't do 135 for 5,5,5, maybe you can do 130 for 5,5,8, or something, and these extra reps will drive progress.

And that's one of the ideas I presented in the "Managing Compromises" article now published on this site. Convergent evolution, and all that. Now, I don't claim to remember all the forum politics and dramas of years ago, whether the guy was banned or just mocked a bit or simply ignored as one voice among thousands. Point is, ideas which were rejected some time ago are now accepted as at least worth considering.

Only the boring people are here for debate. The rest of us are here for discussion. So share your ideas, however loopy they may seem to many of us.