![Quote](https://startingstrength.com/resources/forum/images/misc/quote_icon.png)
Originally Posted by
Tom Narvaez
Sure. I just benched 290x5,4,5 and my training partner just benched 320x5x3. We've been increasing 2.5lbs per session on Mon/Fri.
I think there are four primary reasons for "stalling" on LP:
1) You aren't executing the program properly: not enough sleep, poor nutrition, frequent resets that aren't preceded by stalls but rather done for mental relief and/or to "work on form" which isn't even all that bad. This is a catch all for you're doing shit wrong.
2) You aren't recovered in time for your next session. This is VERY common with squats especially during that initial 3x5 3x per week phase. This is usually indicated by a performance regression: I.e. 330x5x3 on Mon and 335x3,2,2 on Wednesday. You couldn't have gotten that much weaker in two days. The problem is your SRA curve is now longer. Advanced novice programming works well here as do any changes which reduce total workload. Now, eventually, if you keep elongating the SRA curve or keep reducing the work load, you'll recover but you won't have done enough to force adaptation which brings us to...
3) You're under training for your current level of adaptation. This is typically marked by stagnation: I.e. 330x5 and then 332.5x4 while you barely miss the fifth. You haven't really gotten any stronger, or at least not 2.5lbs stronger, so you missed the rep. In this case, you may need to increase the workload. For squats and deadlifts, this often simultaneously elongates the SRA curve BUT NOT ALWAYS for all lifts!
People often assume a 5x5 bench automatically needs a full week of recovery. Not so. Especially not at sub-200 bench numbers which are almost always relatively far from the genetic potential of the trainee. If you switch to 5x5 and notice regression then you'll need to elongate the SRA curve by adding a light day or managing fatigue with some basic level of periodization. However, you could possibly continue to stagnate even at 5x5 at some higher number eventually. Now, you'll need to increase workload again. If you notice regression or under recovery in your next session, elongate the SRA curve with TM/Advanced Novice or whatever. If not, if you stagnate again on the next stall, add even more work.
I will say that six truly hard sets of squats is often more than enough to drive progress for a lot of people. It often isn't on bench/press especially when you're not already quite strong.
4) Inappropriate loading. Look, if your level of volume is causing 1lbs of adaptation, but you're loading 2.5lbs or 5lbs above that each session, you'll stall. You have two options: 1) load less aggressively or 2) do enough volume to cause the size of adaptation you're looking for. That choice should be driven by reasonable progression rates. Going for 0.5lbs PRs once weekly on the bench is probably not smart. Increasing workload, and possibly having to adjust programming for a new SRA curve, is better. However, things get trickier when we are not talking about really small jumps.
The prevailing wisdom around here is that anything less than 5lbs per week isn't worth your time as a late novice or early intermediate. I think that's nonsense. Unless you have a 500+ lift, that's greater than 1% per week on your e1RM. Expecting that is really too much even on squats and deadlifts, IMO.
I don't have good rules for this yet. In the past, my solution was very small jumps (1-2lbs) but also include a rep range so that progress is somewhat auto regulated. However, novices can't handle rep ranges because they don't know how to use RPEs correctly. So now I default to resetting and usually smaller increment jumps after each reset (or at my discretion which I obviously can't transfer to anyone else in terms of judgement).
I'd probably suggest going for a longer SRA curve that gets you at least 2.5 weekly before loading less than ~1.5-2lbs per bench session on a twice weekly LP.
Of course, all of this assumes that you'd prefer to keep LP going which is not strictly necessary. There is always the riskier option of more advanced programming or just a different kind altogether. The risk is you may not progress at all. The potential reward is that you progress MUCH faster than on LP -- especially if you've been under training significantly and the new program rectifies that.