adjusting rep ranges to continue linear progression

[cjd]

Hi Coach - I was wondering if, assuming someone has done the program correctly, reset twice, moved on the advanced novice program, and eventually stopped progressing on that, if it would be possible to continue linearly progressing by moving from doing sets of 5 to say, sets of 3 (say 5x3 or 3x3) before moving onto the TM or whatnot? I would think that, at the very least, there is some adaptation that be squeezed out in that rep range that wasn't trained by doing 5s across. Or is the ability to make progress without manipulating other variables basically tapped out by this point of adaptation?

Thanks.

[MikeC1]

This would be the logical step if you were trying to peak for a 1RM at a meet, but if you want to be good at doing 5s, you have to do 5s. So the rep range isn't the variable to manipulate here. Now when you stop making progress, you have to decide correctly if the reason is because of too much accumulating fatigue, or not enough volume. In the first case, the variable to manipulate would be the intensity, or what's the same thing, the frequency of heavy workouts. That's the function that the advanced novice program serves, and one possible next logical change would be to move to a medium-light-heavy routine. Note that this is not the same thing as the TM, and your progress should still be faster on this than on the TM. In the second case, you should probably switch straight to the TM or a similar routine that includes higher volume workouts.

[Justin Jordan]

I've done this as part of my cycle; basically I start with three sets of five, run that until I can't get the reps (usually with a reset or two) then switch to five sets of three, then five sets of doubles with a back off set. I try to keep the total number of reps fairly similar.

(Actually, I specifically try for thirty five to forty reps across all sets of an exercise, including warmups)

It works pretty well, but I do this because I have yet to feel like dicking around with more complicated programming like the Texas Method. Doing this is simpler, but I wouldn't expect it to be better than TM.

[Rezart Erindi]

That's the function that the advanced novice program serves, and one possible next logical change would be to move to a medium-light-heavy routine. Note that this is not the same thing as the TM, and your progress should still be faster on this than on the TM. In the second case, you should probably switch straight to the TM or a similar routine that includes higher volume workouts.

Well, the Medium-Light-Heavy, would be a Starr program, which is similar to TM, but with less volume. Why do you think that progress on Starr would be faster than on TM?