4/11/17
Home
SQ: ascending sets to 165x5
BP: ascending sets to 165x5x3
DL: 165x5
Here is a link to my latest intermediate log: 1 plate, 2 plates, 3 plates (4?)
I just did the SS Challenge where my best lifts were 128k, 56k, and 147k for SQ, P, and DL, respectively.
As you can see, they are pretty modest. Having read The Barbell Prescription, I look back and conclude that I never DTFP by the book.
So, after about 10 days off, after the meet, I am going to try and do just that, with an LP. Since the SS meets, and USAPL meets, use kilos, I have restated my goals thusly:
60K Press (I was really hoping to take that as my third attempt at the meet)
100K Bench
140K Squat
175K Deadlift (missed 155K at the meet)
4/11/17
Home
SQ: ascending sets to 165x5
BP: ascending sets to 165x5x3
DL: 165x5
The Deadlift target should be 180, surely?
Look forward to seeing you nail those goals!
4/13/17
Gym: first day back since the 4/1 meet. Wrote my modest 1RM's on the PR board.
SQ: 165x5x3
P 1.0: vanity had me consider doing these in privacy, at home, in my garage, since my workset weight was going to be 65. But I thought better of it. I don't hate Press 2.0. But I do hate my inability to leverage the hip bounce at workset weights. It gets muted the heavier I go. So I'll do version 1.0 and reset my reps at the bottom. If and when I miss a rep, I'll reset my reps at the top (stretch reflex). If and when I miss a rep after that, I'll still do version 1.0, but I'll do a little bounce from the bottom of my rack (not from the hips). If and when I miss a rep after that, I might switch to version 2.0.
DL: 185x5
4/15/17
Gym
SQ: 175x5x3
BP: 140x5x3
DL: 205x5
Great lifts man. I'm getting confused in your recent posts, are you switching between lbs and kg's?
Happy to see the meet results come out this evening:
2017 Starting Strength Challenge Results | US Strengthlifting Federation
The August USAPL meet was hard on my ego because I was first in my flight order and last in the results. I am superficial, because I don't want to be last in any respect, which is what I looked for first in the SS meet results. But the data is so comprehensive, I'm sure I can look at them from a variety of perspectives over time.