What Evidence Do We Have that Starting Strength Is the Best Out There?

[Mark Rippetoe]

Plenty do. Stronglifts 5x5 is a novice program. Juggernaut Training has a novice program. There are a ton but there, but none are layed out in detail as well as SS. None go nearly in depth on proper form. None go into what determines if a lifter is a Novice/Intermediate/Advanced lifter but they do specify if their program is novice, intermediate, or advanced and give programs for all 3 stages. None go into how to program intermediate or advanced programming, just give a template. And none yield high enough results to rival SS.....that doesn't make them bad, just suboptimal....or less good....

Where did the idea of novice/intermediate/advanced programming come from?

[Frankie]

Why is Starting Strength better than all the thousands of other exercise programs out there.

I know Hypertrophy Max says it was the best program for muscle building.

Any way to prove that Starting Strength is better?

You don't see antibiotics being pitched as 'the best out there', you simply use it for it's specific efficacy and you do it every time because it works. There is quantifiable evidence of the outcomes publicly available everywhere to convince you. The book doesn't need you, you are already here because you need the book.

[Jared Nessland]

Why is Starting Strength better than all the thousands of other exercise programs out there.

I know Hypertrophy Max says it was the best program for muscle building.

Any way to prove that Starting Strength is better?

I think one of the best things about the SS gym franchise, will be the ability to show exactly this! In a few years, with several gyms up and running, there will be thousands of lifters data available to show exactly this.

[Adam Skillin]

Any way to prove that Starting Strength is better?

With the assumption that you're asking about the Novice Linear Progression, I actually think Rip has been exceptionally clear about this in the books he's written and published, as well as dozens or hundreds of articles, videos, and conversations here on this discussion board. You can get your hands on most of that content right here on this very website. The evidence we have is the accumulated centuries (maybe millennium?) of coaching experience that we SSC's have collectively accumulated, the logs on the boards, etc... It's empirical, but not double-blind or placebo-controlled (he's also been really clear about why that isn't possible - you know, in all those books and articles). But what we also have is a very compelling analysis (compelling to most of us around here, at least) about why using large amounts of muscle mass to move heavy (and progressively heavier) weights over the longest effective ranges of motion is, by definition, the most efficient way we can make the (novice) human organism strong.

I can't think of a single aspect of the Starting Strength novice programming that isn't fully explained and supported by the analysis presented in the books (which you should buy) and then further examined in multiple articles or videos that Rip has made available to you and me for free. Why progressive overload for novices? Why barbells vs. machines? Why low bar back squats, presses, deadlifts, bench press, and power cleans? Why fives? All those questions have been thoroughly answered via multiple media. Nobody is asking you to take it on faith. If you look for the answers to your question(s) in the books and/or some of the articles and videos, gain an understanding the analysis presented therein, and still come to a different conclusion, you're free to do any other program you like, just don't leave the dumbbells strewn all about the gym.