Progress on pressing movements

[Satch12879]

Sure. My bench made better progress once I switched to programming with higher volume that grew more pec muscle though.

The consensus has been pretty clear on this forum among users who have tried Texas method for extended periods that it's a poor program for bench gains. The most common tip I've seen powerlifters offer for a stalled bench is higher frequency, and 1.5 or 2 times a week just isn't that much after a while for the less training sensitive.

Key phrase here...

[Satch12879]

I’ll double up because I’m fucking sick of this nonsense and I can’t wait.

Basically, because the stress stimulus was insufficient to drive an adaptation, you had to change the dose of stress. When you did that, you saw increased gains.

To say “muh volume” is the actual explanation of the mechanism at play is next to useless if you actually care what’s going on.

[Michael Wolf]

I don't think benching three times a week constitutes as wild inappropriate "seductive complexity". That's fairly basic solution IMO.

After the first 3 questions thing is answered, which I totally agree with Rip that that is probably the first place to look, Perman's response probably the next place to go. (changing bench/press to intermediate programming, which might entail more volume and frequency which is just a defacto thing that should happen when you switch)

Increasing upper body volume and possibly frequency per week is a very reasonable early to mid intermediate change, sure. But you're agreeing with me, really, so I'm not sure what the point of your post was, unless it was to argue that the vast majority of people asking this Q have a) made sure their form is actually good, and b) adjusted their training in line with The First Three Questions, if it wasn't already.

If that's what you're asserting, then you'd have a very hard time convincing me of that, based on my interactions with tens of thousands of people as clients, seminar and training camp attendees, and here on the forums or elsewhere online.

It's a midwit response when the question is posed with little to no background info, and then replied to as such without asking for any of that background info. The assumption is that the person is doing everything right, and has stalled anyway. That is rarely the case. Usually it's something much simpler.

In cases where the person has good form, has taken care of The First Three Questions, and has actually still run out of upper body progress on LP or early intermediate programming, then yes, it's not an unreasonable reply at all. The stress needs to go up, and that is a frequently used way to do so successfully. But to give it as a reply without being given or probing for more info that is extremely likely to show that it's something much simpler and more fundamental, is a midwit move.

I can allow for the possibility of someone being so sick and tired of answering poorly framed, insufficiently information'd questions just giving it as a pat answer sometimes. It gets tiresome having to draw out people's actual questions for them, or the info needed to answer their Qs, for free, for someone you don't know, have no reason to care about, and will likely never meet, who might very well think you owe them something for no reason other than that they're here and they're breathing. Hell, maybe if you search enough through the forums, you'll find a place where I've done this too. But that's a human failing, and we're all subject to those.

To give it as the actual answer that you think is correct, without addressing the other issues and info, is what I'm calling a midwit move.

[wicat3]

Ok so let me give you some background info to help. I am 33 years old, 185lbs male. I started doing starting strength mid July 2018. My starting numbers at that time were as follows:
Squat-115 lbs
Press-65 lbs
Dead lift- 125 lbs
Bench- 110 lbs

Mid November I switched programs ending with these numbers:
Squat-185 lbs
Press-90 lbs
Dead lift-210 lbs
Bench- 135 lbs

I did the bridge program which didn't work out at all. I started back up on SS on 1-23-19 with these numbers
Squat-160 lbs
Press-85 lbs
Dead Lift- 185 lbs
Bench- 145 lbs

My last numbers as of Feb. 1st are these:
Squat-185 lbs
Press- 95 lbs
Dead lift- 205 lbs
Bench- 150 lbs.

For the three questions I rest 2-3 minutes that I use a timer for. I will try to do a full 5 minute rest between pressing movements as this is where I feel are the hardest. My jumps in weight are usually 5lbs. The last question could be a major downfall for me. I work an odd shift so my typical day looks like this, I get home from work around 1 am and sleep till 7:30-8 am. So roughly 6-7 hours a night. On my weekends I sometimes get more sleep but that's only 2 days. As for my diet and food intake, I know I could do better there too. I haven't tracked my food in a while but I try to eat relatively clean. Most days my meals look like this:
Breakfast:
Eggs2-3 some days whole eggs while other days its just egg whites
2 slices of bacon
1-2 slices of bread

Lunch:
Turkey burger or turkey tacos
Deli cheese
lettece
tomato
some days bacon

Dinner:
Chicken
rice or a potato

I haven't weighed anything but I'm sure if I was to try to count my protein number I am low as to what I need. I know I need to get better at it and start getting my protein numbers up.

As of now I have not stalled on the restart of the program. I know that my 150lbs bench felt heavy last time but I think I could squezze out 155lbs and hopefully keep progressing. My press feels heavy but i think I could keep going. I just know that I noticed last time that my numbers climb hit a stalling point than back slide.

[perman]

Key phrase here...

So the main program recommended for lifters in the phase PPT3 suggests most lifters will remain in for the most of their lives is meant to be run for a short time? I've seen similar sentiments before, but PPT3 is misleading if that is the case. It suggests further complexity is only required for older lifters or very strong lifters, and that most others aren't advanced.

Of course the problem here is that the SRA model proposed in PPT3 is wrong and leads to a flawed programming framework. Muscle protein synthesis actually is quicker the more trained you are, meaning you get more elevation for shorter periods of times, such that the entire argument that the SRA cycle extends to a week for intermediates (thus Texas Method) or longer for advanced is actually the exact opposite of how the SRA cycle changes for lifters who are more adapted to the stimulus of lifting.

That training advancement leads to reduced progress has nothing to do with SRA cycle growing longer, and the need for increased complexity is used to support a wrong model.

[Adam Gottstein]

OP, good choice on resting more. 5 mins will help more than it might seem, especially since bench and press don't stress the entire body the same way squats do.

You also need to eat more. Your sample day seems less than 2000 calories to me. One of the hallmarks of NLP is that, at your size, your weight should be going up consistently. Weight going up equals mass being added to your body, including (and predominantly, if you're doing it right) muscle.

Beyond that, keep in mind that it's ok for the weight to feel heavy. You are lifting progressively heavier weight. You should reach the point where the days it doesn't feel heavy are the surprise. Also, if you make sure you have the ability to add smaller increments (e.g. +2.5lb), that will help immensely with presses as they will stop progressing at 5s sooner.

[Mark Rippetoe]

Of course the problem here is that the SRA model proposed in PPT3 is wrong and leads to a flawed programming framework. Muscle protein synthesis actually is quicker the more trained you are, meaning you get more elevation for shorter periods of times, such that the entire argument that the SRA cycle extends to a week for intermediates (thus Texas Method) or longer for advanced is actually the exact opposite of how the SRA cycle changes for lifters who are more adapted to the stimulus of lifting.

Do you actually believe this? Why?

[wicat3]

OP, good choice on resting more. 5 mins will help more than it might seem, especially since bench and press don't stress the entire body the same way squats do.

You also need to eat more. Your sample day seems less than 2000 calories to me. One of the hallmarks of NLP is that, at your size, your weight should be going up consistently. Weight going up equals mass being added to your body, including (and predominantly, if you're doing it right) muscle.

Beyond that, keep in mind that it's ok for the weight to feel heavy. You are lifting progressively heavier weight. You should reach the point where the days it doesn't feel heavy are the surprise. Also, if you make sure you have the ability to add smaller increments (e.g. +2.5lb), that will help immensely with presses as they will stop progressing at 5s sooner.

Thanks. I will start eating more, focus on more protein. Ill start resting 5 minutes too

[Satch12879]

So the main program recommended for lifters in the phase PPT3 suggests most lifters will remain in for the most of their lives is meant to be run for a short time? I've seen similar sentiments before, but PPT3 is misleading if that is the case. It suggests further complexity is only required for older lifters or very strong lifters, and that most others aren't advanced.

Of course the problem here is that the SRA model proposed in PPT3 is wrong and leads to a flawed programming framework. Muscle protein synthesis actually is quicker the more trained you are, meaning you get more elevation for shorter periods of times, such that the entire argument that the SRA cycle extends to a week for intermediates (thus Texas Method) or longer for advanced is actually the exact opposite of how the SRA cycle changes for lifters who are more adapted to the stimulus of lifting.

That training advancement leads to reduced progress has nothing to do with SRA cycle growing longer, and the need for increased complexity is used to support a wrong model.

PPST3 is very clear on who should or should not be doing vanilla TM. It’s decidedly not for inconsistent post-novice trainees.

It also definitely talks about how eventually you’re going to need more complex programming after you’ve progressed through a run of TM and you need more cumulative stress spread out over a longer period of time to drive an adaptation. The coaches have talked about this too; eventually, yes, TM stops working.

I’m looking forward to Rip’s comments on the rest.

[Mark Rippetoe]

I'm still waiting on the Norwegian to regurgitate the bullshit he's been taught about muscle protein synthesis, and how everybody eventually needs to train 18 hours a day to get to 450 pounds of LBM at 2% bodyfat.