Progress on pressing movements

[Rob Waskis]

The other thing about being in great gyms is you get to see how many approaches actually work. When you are exposed to that you tend to engage less argument and you realize the futility of trying to prove that this or that approach is superior to all else.

Yeah, I remember when I first squatted 315 and set out on a mission to proselytize The Way. By the time I had squatted 405 I stopped that shit. When I hit 495, I realized I don’t know shit.

I don't know Les, but just listening to him engage here, my guess is that he's been around a few decent gyms in his time and seen what I've seen.

I don’t know him either, but he’s the nicest guy on this forum, and I read what he types twice.

One thing that is highlighted in this particular thread is that many of those involved seem to think that there is the Aasgard Approach vs the RTS inspired approach and that is where the dividing line is - the two options. The reality is that there are legions of big strong lifters out there who have never heard of either approach, do their own thing that doesn't conform to either model, and still get strong. And no, they are not all genetic freaks who take steroids.

Yeah, a buddy of mine from the gym is a bodybuilder. Fairly high level, he had his pro card and got a sponsorship from MHP. He didn’t so the Aasgard thing, or the RTS thing, or the BBM thing, or whatever. He was really big and strong though.

[Rob Waskis]

If you want me to be completely honest, I don't exactly why it's true. I do know that our data from thousands and thousands of lifters at SSOC tells us that it is, along with my two decades of coaching experience. I THINK it's true because I believe that a 425lb squat for sets across is a similar stress event to a max effort 600lb squat...enough so that it's specific enough to drive a strength adaptation, whereas a 120lb squat is not as significant of a stress event for the person who squats 175, and therefore not enough stress and not specific enough to drive the strength adaptation.

Where do you think the line can be drawn? I’m sincerely asking. Sets of 350 for a 500lb squatter are good. Sets of 120 for a 175lb squatter aren’t. Where does it cross from useless to useful? I would guess at around a 385lb max (squat, for a guy), but I’d welcome your input.

[Andy Baker (KSC)]

I think it likely exists on a spectrum, rather than a line that can be drawn at a certain weight. In fact I’m positive of that. And then its is further muddied by all kinds of other individual factors that play into it. Aside from the characteristics of the lifter, what about things like bar speed? Squatting 70% like you are taking out the laundry is not the same as squatting 70% with maximal speed and acceleration.

[Matt Reynolds]

I think it likely exists on a spectrum, rather than a line that can be drawn at a certain weight. In fact I’m positive of that. And then its is further muddied by all kinds of other individual factors that play into it. Aside from the characteristics of the lifter, what about things like bar speed? Squatting 70% like you are taking out the laundry is not the same as squatting 70% with maximal speed and acceleration.

Agreed 100% (as I almost always do with Andy). Understand the main thesis behind the point, rather than trying to pigeonhole us into a an exact number. (PS - I know you weren't trying to do that maliciously). The theory is....as you get stronger and stronger, a lower % of intensity remains a rather traumatic stress event compared to when you are weak.