New gym, westside?

[PaulBeech]

Im doing the westside conjugate method as a raw lifter at the moment. Personally im only cycling DE work and ME work for deads between sumo and conventional. For ME squats and bench i just do them and no cycling at all and its working. My maxes have gone up pretty well since starting. As for DE work, well pulling singles from a deficit seems to be helping me pull extremely better from the floor than i used to.

[simonsky]

Im doing the westside conjugate method as a raw lifter at the moment. Personally im only cycling DE work and ME work for deads between sumo and conventional. For ME squats and bench i just do them and no cycling at all and its working. My maxes have gone up pretty well since starting. As for DE work, well pulling singles from a deficit seems to be helping me pull extremely better from the floor than i used to.

BLASPHEMY! YOU ARE DEFINITELY ON DRUGS! SPEED WORK CAUSES AIDS ON RAW LIFTERS.

brb doing westside verbatim from internet articles and failing miserably

[simonsky]

Sorry Paul, I just had a roid rage. I'm taking too many PED's, that's the only reason why these past 2 meets I PR'd my deadlift 12.5kgs both times using westside concepts.

Anyway, I've said this before, TM is similar to westside. Do speed work instead of 5x5, and I'd argue that max effort day is exactly the same as intensity day. As for rotating exercises, some westside fanboy suggested alternating power cleans then deadlifts, then haltings/rackpulls. His name is Rip, and he's not a westside fanboy. Alternating the press and bench too. Changing rep ranges as well.

Bands don't carryover? Then do less of it.
Box squats not helping free squats? Ditch em.
Told not to deadlift in training and failing miserably? Deadlift when you fucking train. Wide squats hurt hips? Use a closer stance.
It's not rocket science.

[hamburgerfan]

Well I've been training there for about a week and I've already shaved my head and gotten a tattoo, and I hope to squat and bench 800 and deadlift 400 in an SPF meet next month.

[cannibal.horse]

Might be a correlation, eh?

I'll try not to be a douche right off the bat. What is your total and at what weight? I'm really not impressed by someone pulling 200kx6. My deadlift sucks, for now, but that is just about what I squat. I don't run the conjugate method so my pull is irrelevant to the program's effectiveness.

Here i am again typing this out for a second time because my computer died.

My total is 220/140/260 at 95. I get that you dont think thats strong but last i checked you hadent even managed 180/140/220 yet.

Bull-fucking-shit. Cite your sources. What study "debunked" this? I can get more than a dozen raw lifters in this thread who will claim otherwise.

This is why i hate arguing training theory with anyone. I have to show them how to google and it takes a fucking long time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ea9tCH4SyYM&feature=player_embedded

And because a lot of you won't bother clicking on and listening to a 2-minute clip, here is a brief and partial transcript...

"When we got faster using lighter weights (60 and 70%), we then went to the heavier weights--80% and above--and we looked at force production. Our force production didn't change. So for us the argument that getting faster with a lighter weight translates into your ability to move heavier weights faster did NOT hold water...

"And that is my two cents on why I don't think speed work holds water when training the powerlifts...

"...And this was back when I was training equipped--both single ply and multi-ply. The numbers are more staggering when you look at a guy competing raw...

"...You may think you're moving the weight faster than you are and you think that translates to more force, but this little box (tendo) will tell you the true story."


--Eric Talmant

Question:
Right, so previously you were questioned as to whether speed training could be used to increase your max. Your response was no, that it could not. It is just a tool for increasing rate of force development.
(http://asp.elitefts....?qid=88816&tid=)

To be honest, I disagree with this entirely. I'd like to explain why by applying simple physics.
Muscular strength is defined as maximum force a muscle can exert. The general equation for force is based on several parameters: mass, distance, and time. Consider this equation, Force = (mass x velocity)/ time. Therefore, I've directly linked maximal lifting potential (force) to speed (velocity) with this well known equation. Let me know your thoughts on this.

Answer
Frank, I appreciate your interest in the subject; however, despite the large forces, which of course must be specified in order to have a meaningful discussion, that are generated against sub-maximal barbell loads, via the DE method, you must consider the variables associated with improved intra-muscular coordination (rate coding, recruitment, and synchronization) and the percentages of Fmm that correspond to each respective neural factor.

More from Zatsiorsky:

In small muscles most MUs are recruited at a level of force less than 50% of Fmm; thereafter, rate coding plays the major role in the further development of force up to Fmm. In large proximal muscles, such as the deltoid and biceps, the recruitment of additional MUs appears to be the main mechanism for increasing force development up to 80% Fmm and even higher. In the force range between 80% and 100% of Fmm force is increased almost exclusively by intensification of MU firing rate.

What must be compared, then, is, considering the same lifter, the forces generated during DE training compared against the forces generated during Fmm attempts. Thus, the overload itself must be closely scrutinized. In this regard we must pay special attention to the fact that "there are no substantial correlations between Fmm and the force Fm in movements with minimal external resistance. The correlation is greater when the resistance is increased."(Zatsiorsky)

The critical factor, again, is the overload itself and this is why, from a coordination standpoint, the actual lifting and handling of maximal weights presents a different problem than the lifting and handling of sub-maximal weights; regardless of the speed at which they are lifted.

It is clear, then, why many of the lifters who subscribe more closely to the WSB method have in certain cases, over the years, increased the load (via accommodating resistance means) on the DE day; as the greater resistance more closely approaches the Fmm range and actually reduced the load on ME day to more repeated and sub-maximal efforts.

Or, from an alternative viewpoint, let us recall the advice routinely given to certain populations of lifters who are WSB influenced and experiencing plateaus on ME day and advised to reduce the bar weight utilized on DE day.

In either case, one may state that the DE method is effectively complimented by an additional training method as a second training session during the week- hence one of the fundamentals of the WSB method.

In the case of lesser percentages of 1RM used on DE day the ME training satisfies the training of neural factors which most positively correspond to the Fmm.

In the case of greater overload used on DE day (in the form of bands, chains or otherwise) the neural factors more closely correspond to Fmm and thus the second training day is more wisely designated for sub-maximal and/or repeated efforts.

What I'd like to point out is that I'm not taking the standpoint that the DE method of lifting barbells has no purpose towards maximal strength development; because it has been, and continues to be, utilized by many for this very reason; HOWEVER, let us acknowledge the capacity at which it is simultaneously utilized in the training along with the use of additional training methods; hence the conjugation.

Let us take note that the majority of lifts, accounted for over time and categorized into different percentages of the limit, fall in the sub-maximal range for the majority of high class powerlifters and Olympic weightlifters.

My message to those interested, then, is that the DE method of lifting barbells is not necessary for developing maximal strength. As a result, and due to the fact that it is simply a variation of the sub-maximal effort method (from the standpoint of the overload that is used), it is my suggestion to those who do utilize the DE method to replace it with the sub-maximal effort method (in which they cease to place value on bar speed) and enjoy the positive experience of continued strength gains at a lesser structural and neuromuscular expense.

I trust that I have explained myself well enough.

I've exhausted my interest in devoting any more time towards this matter and will no longer address any questions that relate to it in any way, shape, or form.

[cannibal.horse]

Question
Speed-strength is what I believe we all train on speed day which is moving fast with sub max light weights in the 50-70% range. Can you clarify that Strength-Speed is moving fast with sub maximal but heavier weights in the 70-90%. If one were bad in the strength-speed phase what should the focus be. Also, if one were faster then strong, would one benefit from strength-speed over speed-strength on DE day. Would also doing heavy reps in the 4-6 range be strength speed assuming they were done as explosively as possible?


Answer
Joe, in order to discuss speed strength and strength speed with any meaningful context we must discuss the training means and the specific sport.

It is entirely nebulous to have a discussion without providing more meaningful context.

By definition we know that speed strength characterizes an unloaded or very small externally loaded movement to be executed with the greatest possible speed.

Strength speed also demands that the load be moved with the greatest possible speed; however, the load must be greater because the velocity must be lower in order to develop strength.

I think that it's too vague to limit the parameters of speed strength and strength speed to two absolute parameters.

Example:

Lifter A squats 60% with the greatest possible speed, then Lifter A squats 80% with the greatest possible speed.

Regardless of the actual velocity attained on either lift we know that the 60 is faster and the 80 is slower.

But how much more speed is developed with 60 and how much more strength is developed with 80...

It doesn't end there, however.

We can easily draw any comparison we want:

39% to 89%
45% to 93%
56% to 58%
70% to 94%
and on and on and on

The reality is that, assuming the load is moved as fast as possible, the lighter the load the faster it moves and, thus, the greater the speed component.

Alternatively, the greater the load the slower it moves and, thus, the greater the strength component.

To state that a powerlifter, who trains according to what is publicly recognized as the Westside method, trains speed strength on DE day is only meaningful within the context of that system because we know that the loads lifted on the primary ME exercise are much greater.

If one uses an accelerometer such as the Tendo we know that the target on DE day is somewhere in the vicinity of .7 and .8 meters per second. As the load increases the velocity will decrease to .6, .5, .4 etc and as the velocity slows we know that strength is the governing factor that determines whether the load is successfully lifted

NOT SPEED

Which is why as my knowledge grew I became confused as to why a powerlifter would lift lighter loads as fast as possible.

The only way that I am able to rationalize the efficacy of this for a powerlifter, who trains according to the Westside model, is to state that any 'speed' developed on DE day is secondary in importance, relative to the goal of improving the limit of strength, to the fact that you are simply lifting less weight and the lesser weight is a reprieve from the heavier weight lifted on ME day.

I suspect that this is the appeal of the program that Joe Defranco has popularized in which there is simply a heavier day of lifting and a lighter day of lifting.

Back to discussing speed strength and strength speed, a powerlifter who trains according to Westside might state that he/she is moving 'fast' on DE day and, thereby, developing speed strength; however, if we widen the context to comparing different training objectives such as a lifting a barbell at .8 meters per second and a world class 100m sprinter who reaches 12 METERS PER SECOND! then we see that, comparatively, the .8 meters per second that the powerlifter is squatting the barbell might as well be in slow motion compared to the velocity that the sprinter is moving.

So, according to this example, the .8 m/s that the powerlifter squats the bar on DE day is faster than the velocity that a limit weight is lifted on ME day and by comparison more speed strength is developed on DE day;, the sprinter who trains at +10 m/s during training might as well be moving at light speed compared to the powerlifter lifting 50-60% at .8 m/s

My point?

Why would a powerlifter spend training time and energy on lifting the barbell faster.

If he/she is sold on a heavy day and a lighter day why not simply lift the sub-max loads at a comfortable speed.

After all, the Soviets found that the optimal tempo of lifting for strength development was NOT slow, nor is it FAST, but rather, MODERATE

Speed strength and strength speed are relative terms.

It is more accurate to state that one is developing 'more' speed strength or 'more' strength speed than to make the blanket statement that one is training speed strength or one is training strength speed.

Joe, the question you asked me seems to indicate that you are referencing lifting barbells.

The question I ask you is...

Unless you are competing in a 'who can lift X percentage the fastest contest'- why are you concerned with how fast you lift the barbell?

Of the barbell sports (powerlifting and weightlifting) neither athlete is ever judged on how fast the weight is lifted.

The weight is either lifted...

or it's not.

If you were inquiring as to why athletes other than powerlifters or weightlifters might train for more speed strength or more strength speed then I have, in fact, just wasted a great deal of time typing this response.

Theres a collection of related questions at this site:

http://www.motion-online.dk/fora/ind...c=48815&st=-10

[cannibal.horse]

Like I said, you don't know what the congujate method actually is. You can't just copy what the geared guys are doing as a raw lifter. Things are different. Ask Mike Hedlesky in his log, on his youtube channel, or on his blog. He'll tell you the same thing.

I fucking love this dumbass westside defense. Despite the fact that elitefts and westside barbell articles have become the normative texts on the westside method 'i dont know what westside method actually is', that is unless im riding your dumbass argument where i can quote from them liberally.

Again, if you're squatting, benching and deadlifting every week with conventional form (what an intermediate lifter needs to practise the lifts) you're not practising congujate method, because the main lifts arent being rotated to prevent stagnation. thats a pretty fucking basic westside premise.

Mike uses the congujate method. u mad, bro?

Come at my lifts some more. I want you to.

I dont need to. It was more a go at the smartass jibes you made at people with a 180/140/220 total without having reached it. Really i like arguments based on logic and research, yours having neither.

For anyone else: if you're adapting westside theory so much that you're not rotating lifts, periodising lifts and not doing DE work then you're not doing congujate method at all or at very least bastardising it beyond recognition.

There are just better templates out there.

[Tom Narvaez]

Here i am again typing this out for a second time because my computer died.

My total is 220/140/260 at 95. I get that you dont think thats strong but last i checked you hadent even managed 180/140/220 yet.

Let's get this pissing contest completely straight before I actually bother to address anything that is actually relevant in your post.

People in that thread, including you, apparently, got pissed because I said that I didn't consider 1200 "strong" due to the fact that I thought most young males could accomplish that in their first year or so. You may disagree with that particular method of determining the relative value of strength, but I'd doubt you'd argue the timeline too voraciously considering you've only been lifting for three years yourself. I thought that you were trying to use your stats and training experience to "prove" that you were more qualified or something, but it turns out you're just another random person holding a grudge because I don't have the same standards as you? ~1350!=~1200 so I'd say that my opinion of what 1200 represents is completely irrelevant to your lifts.

Just in case you want the actual facts here, my best lifts are ~202.5x5 (no wraps) / ~110x5 / ~180x5 (conventional) @ ~105-110. I'm 5'6" and I have been training for 11 months. I only recently switched to sumo because, as we all know, sumo is NDTFP, but it works for my anthropometry better and I expect to pass my best conventional numbers in no time. Anyways, I find it interesting that you're willing to say things like "have fun pulling less than 600" when you've never done it yourself, either (apparently). Seems pretty fucking hypocritical.

I fucking love this dumbass westside defense. Despite the fact that elitefts and westside barbell articles have become the normative texts on the westside method 'i dont know what westside method actually is', that is unless im riding your dumbass argument where i can quote from them liberally.

Again, if you're squatting, benching and deadlifting every week with conventional form (what an intermediate lifter needs to practise the lifts) you're not practising congujate method, because the main lifts arent being rotated to prevent stagnation. thats a pretty fucking basic westside premise.

Again, this is where the fucking disconnect is. The so-called "normative text" is not only out-dated, but entirely applicable to raw lifters. Also, what do you think most DE/RE day work is if not practicing technique on the main lifts? Louie runs certification programs just for the raw stuff. Raw lifters are often encouraging to do things for time on DE day. I mean there's so many things that I could get into detailing, but I don't even run the conjugate method and it isn't my job to defend Westside what-so-ever. You're so sure that the conjugate method is a collection of shit from a book that is years old, but like I said you're criticizing something that most people aren't actually doing. For the sake of getting on some common ground, which I highly doubt you even want to do, just take a look at Mike's log and you'll see what an elite raw/single-ply guy does on his DE days:
forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=140828091&p=898805811

Your criticisms of the program, outside of the availability of special equipment, really aren't that relevant. That said, thanks for posting stuff from Talmant because I always find him interesting and worth listening to.

Really i like arguments based on logic and research, yours having neither.

We weren't having an argument. I was linking to successful lifters who run Westside and you claimed that were "a bunch" of people shitting the bed "maxing out every week" without linking to any specific logs. In other words, you were making things up to further your agenda (or do you have links after all?). I guess you don't like that things have evolved, and constantly do with these conjugate guys, but that's just the way it is. Not to get too far away from the comment that rustled your jimmies so hard, I think you've pretty much proven, conclusively, that you do NOT, in fact, know what the conjugate method is all about. Please continue to talk about why outdated DE procedures are ineffective, how they should be RE instead (a lot of times they are for raw guys), etc. etc.

There are just better templates out there.

Maybe for you, but this just your opinion. I wonder if you'd say the same thing to the guys that are actually totaling raw elite with the conjugate method? I linked to around five of them.

In any case, people are gonna do whatever the fuck they wanna do. Looks like our buddy hamburgerfan already made his choice.

[veryhrm]

I don't know any powerlifters... (only some PTs and CF types w/ squats in the 300s or maybe low 4s) but i find it practically impossible to "argue" about programming. You can talk about it like you might talk about religion or wine or "art" but there's no definitive science to fall back on or to arbitrate. Ultimately if people are friendly it's all "cool story bro" and you either try the stuff if it sounds good to you or you don't. The complicating factor of PEDs at the high level of all strength sports for the whole modern era confounds things further. It's pretty depressing imho.

(And when things aren't friendly... well see e.g. that chaos and masturbation thread next door (which i stopped reading a week or two ago) )

This is why i hate arguing training theory with anyone. I have to show them how to google and it takes a fucking long time.

[quotes by a bunch of people about DE]

basically.. "cool story bro"... those are some interesting theories from various people but there's no "proof" there because there's no science really. The only thing that comes close is perhaps the mention that the Russians found out that strength is best developed at Moderate speeds. I'm not saying you're wrong but you're getting way too pissed off (or being a jerk) about something that can't be proven definitively with either way with the level of knowledge available to humanity right now.

One aspect of the DE stuff is, in addition to the rate coding, the fact that you're pushing hard to accelerate the weight so that you can generate high peak forces even w/ a comparatively light weight. In a DE set you can, if you are motivated and push hard enough, at some stages of the lift reach forces as high as you would with a ME set, but they are only there for short periods of time. And your body isn't as beaten up by holding a heavy weight before and after the rep. It's possible that this allows for some form of peak force stimulation but w/ less wear and tear and maybe THAT is a method of action without any reference to speed strength or strength speed.

Which actually is what the guy in the asp.net quote comes around to after he spends a few sentences talking about neural blah blah blah:

"What I'd like to point out is that I'm not taking the standpoint that the DE method of lifting barbells has no purpose towards maximal strength development; because it has been, and continues to be, utilized by many for this very reason; HOWEVER, let us acknowledge the capacity at which it is simultaneously utilized in the training along with the use of additional training methods; hence the conjugation."

So after "no you can't use DE to build maximal strength" he goes to "well... you can't use JUST DE, but using DE + ME obviously works because lots of people do it." And even that, as you can tell by the phrasing, is just kind of where he comes down on it, not what you would call "proof".

[Carlos Daniel]

Just stirring the shit

Mike Tuchscherer has trained with Mark Bell (which uses Westside principles) and has analysed video footage from Westside and he is of the opinion that it's somewhat silly and that the stuff that Louie says on his writings is vastly different from what the top guys at Westside actually do. So stop fucking worshiping what Louie Simmons says and do what fucking works for you. If you want to call it the conjugate system then go ahead, but you can call it the pepperoni system and it would matter a single fuck.