Reply With QuoteThat's cool. Did you just pay the $10 day fee, or did you get coaching too?Originally Posted by williamlexcrawford
Member
I stopped at WFAC on my way from Dallas to Lubbock and it was a really cool experience. I highly recommend it, especially for people that don't train with others.
Member
That's cool. Did you just pay the $10 day fee, or did you get coaching too?
Member
Thursday, 08/09/12 - Heavy Bench, Volume Press
Bench - PR
135x10, 185x5, 205x3, 225x2, 245x1, 260x4, ...added 2 boards... 285x3
Just a 1 rep PR @ 260.
Press
150x5x4, 150x10
I'm sure this is some kind of rep PR too. Press seems to be going well even at a slightly lighter body weight.
LTE
85x12x2, 85x10
Triceps are hamburger meat.
Felt very good about today's session. I don't know what I'm going to do about tomorrow. I'm going out of town at 2pm. I don't care for training in the morning, so I may just do some volume power cleans tomorrow and do the heavy squats at the gym Saturday or Sunday evening. It's gonna be a busy weekend.
Adam, the rack at the gym you mentioned is made by Pro-Elite Strength Systems. It's actually contained within a full 8x8 platform with plate storage. It also has a pull-up bar, and I think it's 8 feet tall. It's really the best piece of equipment in the gym.
The logo on the platform is the gym's logo, Simpson chiropractic-gym-physical therapy:
✓ Member
Honestly, it's been my experience that a lot of people don't have a thorough understanding of the physiology in place and thus, their rationale behind certain methods aren't really valid for consideration.
My personal opinion for a lower fat and then by definition, higher carbohydrate nutritional protocol for a strength/power athlete looking to recomp/gain strength/ etc. is that carbohydrates are protein-sparing, increase nutrient/micronutrient uptake to the skeletal muscle, and increase protein assimilation when combined with adequate doses of BCAA's, specifically leucine, from either meat, protein supplements, or similar. Carbohydrates, when measured, also tend to boost compliance and provide a favorable environment for being a slight caloric deficit, whilst giving the muscle enough substrate to remodel, rebuild, and produce energy for force production.
Fat, on the other hand, is very useful for hormone/steroid synthesis, cellular membrane repair, and absorbing vitamins/minerals/etc. I think some people think you're either "low-fat" or "low-carb", but this is bullocks in my opinion. What we're trying to do is find the optimal blend of macronutrients for a specific individual's activity, physiology, genetics, and goals. Let's use a the macronutrient totals of 250/200/65 to prove a point.
Most people would deem this high carb and low-fat, which is kind of ridiculous considering that that 65g of fat accounts for 25% of the net calories.... That's low all of a sudden? I guess compared to a more ketogenic approach like 150/20/225, it is lower fat, but it all depends on how you're actually defining things.
Ultimately you'll have to tinker with the stuff to figure out your exact macros, however I've seen males your size do so damn well with 200-300/150-400/35-70 that I just don't see any advantage to doing a really high fat intake in place of carbohydrates other than for experimental purposes. If someone was prediabetic or had renal insufficiency or similar pathology likely arising from blood sugar/insulin issues then there's a place for higher fat compared to carbohydrates.
When training in the 1-15 rep range what kind of substrate do muscles prefer to use to produce energy? Carbs. Fat can be used to substitute this, but it is wildly inefficient compared to sugar, even in fat-adapted peoples. A lot of folks say that they can train hard on minimal carbs because they are fat adapted, which to an extent, is true. This occurs because the liver will produce ~100-150g of carbs a day when carbs are restricted. If a person is engaging in 4-5 higher volume/intensity training sessions a week with some conditioning work/extended training sessions then they need carbs- period. This could be accomplished by doing 1-2 carb refeeds throughout the week and getting 300-500g of carbs on these days and <50-100g on the other days, but still this person's average carb intake would be about 160-190g/day when the macros are averaged throughout the week.
Now when good carbs/good fats are high, this provides an excellent stimulus to put on mass. When this is coupled with a higher volume/higher intensity training program- muscles grow. A big problem, in my opinion, is that people continuously undertrain for fear of overtraining. Undertraining + shitty nutrition= awful results, as you might imagine. Anyway, sorry about the novel, it just comes down to personal preference, compliance, and the individual's genetics, physiology, and goals.
Member
I appreciate the novel, really. When you say that ultimately you'll have to tinker with the stuff to figure out your exact macros, it reminds me that I'm actually feeling the results of a "lower" fat diet right now, and I'm benefiting performance-wise. I know I've only been doing it for 3 weeks and have had some off days, but I'm just going to keep doing what's working. I haven't done any tinkering yet, and I would imagine that before I started tracking, the real problem was that my protein intake was probably incredibly low compared to now.
Thanks again, Jordan.
✓ Member
No problem Steve. It could be a bunch of things that have been "righted" with the tracking, but whatever it is- it's working, so don't go on trying to reinvent the wheel. Just push this until progress starts to slow, then adjust incrementally and repeat the process. Wholesale changes on diet/training have relegated tons of people into a world of perpetual suck for years on end, but not you my friend! :-)
Member
IMO, as I just mentioned in Tom's log, the high protein is the NUMBER 1 priority. A guy as smart as Jordan can optimize even beyond that with the fats and carbs, but the protein on its own does wonders.
Member
I just read that. Well said!
Member
Not to hijack the log but I think training style also plays a part.
Higher carb is probably better for someone trying to do higher rep stuff (5 and up). Like 5/3/1. I think this is why I sucked on 5/3/1 while dieting because I didn't eat enough carbs.
I think keto is great for people who train in the 1-3 rep range, and keep workouts down to relatively short duration. I'm playing with keto right now and I can definitely say going past 3-5 reps sucks ass, but I can do less than 5.
Member
The woman who is no longer working there gave me some coaching on my squats and presses, which is what I was working on that day. I just showed up and paid my $10 but I still received a lot of feedback from her (I think her last name was Peterson, maybe?) and the sort of smaller guy that was wearing the gray sweatpants in the SS DVD. I would say for $10 it was a bargain.
Posting Permissions
