Novice programming to Intermediate programming

[gordonrumble]

I'm reading his comment as being that the point of what they are doing is to deliver maximal results in a given time frame, the limiting factor being individual recovery circumstances. Getting results isn't good enough, when they can get better results.

[PMDL]

Then I don't know why that comment was pointed at me, since I didn't say anything about that.

Good is only as good as what the guy can tolerate, and given he specifically asked what would happen if his schedule wouldn't allow "optimum", it sounds like pointless nitpicking.

But who knows.

[hatmanii]

HA, c'mon... you know you just eat, sleep and lift weights at the station anyway!

Sincerely,
Your Brother in Blue

From the way the taxpayers around here act and speak out, that's what you'd think we did! If only...

No, our whole point here is to get the most efficient gains in strength given whatever limitations, if any, a person has with recovery.

I'm not quite understanding your position here. If I am unable to continue progressing at a set rate, then isn't it time to change my progression scheme? If under perfect conditions, I have no doubt that I could progress linearly well into the low 400's in my Squat, the fact is I am not working with perfect conditions, much less optimal ones.

Isn't overall progress worth more than short term progress?

I thank all of you for your given responses. Let's keep the discussion going.

[Sami]

Guys, you're not getting Justin's point. I think he is agreeing with you hatmanii, and simply clarifying PMDL's point.

He's not saying that you should keep doing SS despite all outside factors; he said very clearly, "given whatever limitations, if any, a person has with recovery." Basically, progress as fast as you can, within your limiting factors. If work is a limiting factor, then you can't progress as fast and new programming is needed. This may mean doing other variations of linear progression, or it may mean moving to an intermediate program. Whatever, so long as it's the most efficient use of your resources (time and effort).

This is not strictly the same thing as simply saying "if it gets results for your set of circumstances, it's fine." Clearly, moving to a highly advanced periodization routine may still yield results... over time, it's not the most efficient way to go about it. Why slow progression when there are faster ways to do it, even within your own recovery limitations.

There is always an 'optimum' within a given set of limitations. Make sure you are choosing your own 'optimum'.

[Tom Campitelli]

To add to what Sami said, if you dial back your SS sessions to twice a week, that eqates to 10 pounds of progress a week on the squat. Using intermediate programming, you get 5 pound gains per week. You really do want to train like a novice for as long as you can. If you don't have time to lift three times a week, intermediate programming may not provide the results you want. You are trying to accumulate overload from the multiple sessions, with Mondays being the most stressful from a volume standpoint.

[hatmanii]

As it stands now, I train every third day, on the day before my shift to maximize recovery results. So, I currently train only 5 times over a two week period as-is. Yes, I'm still able to progress linearly in squats for subsequent sessions.

However, if I'm constantly progressing and then resetting due to what I know to be outside recovery issues (thus taking two steps forward one step back) would it not be better to emphasize a training philosophy that will allow for longer sustainable progress?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but intermediate training (Texas Method for example) is used when someone can no longer sustain progress from workout to workout. No matter the reason for not being able to recover, wouldn't it behoove a trainee to move to this style of training (considering that outside factors cannot be amended)?