Progress to Intermediate?

[Astro]

Hi Mark,

I've read your BBT and PPST books cover-to-cover twice and refer to them constantly. They're solid gold! Thank you for your hard work in making resources like that available to the world.

I'm a little confused about the different figures you give here on the forum about results some of your trainees have achieved on the SS model so I want to clarify in my own context.

I have been on the Novice linear progression for 3 months now and my lifts reached a weight just above the Novice strength standard for my weight class and stalled. (For example, the squat 1RM standard is 93kg for a 75kg trainee and my 5RM squat is 97.5kg.) I reduced the load by 10% and worked back up to another stall at the same load. Does that mean that I have come as far as the Novice programming can take me?

[Mark Rippetoe]

Not unless you have unusually poor genetics. Getting stalled at 200 x 5 for a 165lb lifter is not common, and usually indicates diet problems or incremental increases that are too big. You say that it took 3 months to get to 200, so it is probably not the increases. How much weight have you gained on the program?

[Polynomial]

Rip,

I'm curious what you think about novices using belts. I finally received a copy Strong Enough? today and after reading the article on gear I got a sense that you think that using belts is justified in many cases. So I decided to bring one with me today, and even though I was still sore from Wednesday and had some irregularities in my schedule, I got a PR of 3x5 of 225 with much better form than on Wednesday or Sunday, when I was only able to pull 225x5x2 and 220x5 respectively. I'm drinking my milk (making my way up to a gallon - I'm at about about 1/2 - 3/4 of a gallon now, and I switched to whole milk today), but it feels like the belt will really help to drive my squats up a lot and get past those novice sticking points.

[Mark Rippetoe]

That's why the belt is helpful. It helps us get stronger by making the spine more stable and removing core strength as the limiting factor. Now, quit hijacking the thread.

[Astro]

Thanks for your quick reply.

So, the way the strength standards tables work is you should get to about Intermediate weight before you need Intermediate programming?

Up to now, the lightest plates I've had access to are 1.25kg pairs, so I've been incrementing by 2.5kg. My order of a pair of 0.5kg plates just arrived so I can use them when I need them.

Well, I wasn't actually following the program and that was my mistake (I know, I'm an idiot), I was doing 5x5 instead of 3x5. I gained 3kg on 3000Cal a day. Although I can't justify doubling my intake by adding a gallon of whole milk a day, I understand that I do need to eat more. I will also start the program with the prescribed volume on Monday and that should also leave some energy for growth.

[Mark Rippetoe]

So, you have gained a total of 6kg on the program, while not actually doing the program. You can't justify drinking enough milk to gain enough weight to get stronger, even though you know it works. And as for your question about intermediate training = intermediate strength standards, you seem to have this guy's problem: http://strengthmill.net/forum/showthread.php?t=591

Read PPST again, ask better questions, and decide whether you're willing to do what's necessary to attain your stated goals.

[coldfire]

So, you have gained a total of 6kg on the program, while not actually doing the program. You can't justify drinking enough milk to gain enough weight to get stronger, even though you know it works. And as for your question about intermediate training = intermediate strength standards, you seem to have this guy's problem: http://strengthmill.net/forum/showthread.php?t=591

Read PPST again, ask better questions, and decide whether you're willing to do what's necessary to attain your stated goals.

I think you meant the second poster in my thread
I understand that strength levels have nothing to do with the programming complexity level.

[Astro]

Hold on Mark, I never said I was doing your program, in fact I just told you that I wasn't doing it. In my original post I only said that I was doing a linear progression.

I did not say I can't justify drinking "enough milk", I said I can't justify doubling my daily energy intake. I can justify eating more to gain weight and I did add 1000Cal to my daily diet when I started training. And now you've helped me realise it's time to increase that again.

I said 3kg not 6kg, read my post again.

I don't see how the post you linked has anything to do with my question so I'll try to rephrase. I asked you to clarify how the strength standards are supposed to be used. I understand that "when the training overload of a single workout and the recovery period allowed for by the 48- to 72-hour schedule does not induce a performance improvement, the novice trainee needs a change of program." I just didn't know how I am supposed to know whether I have reached that point or whether something else is wrong (as you pointed out) without having a rough estimate of how much can be achieved by doing that particular program. In other words, if a 5RM squat of 97.5kg is not a common point for a Novice to stall at, is 113kg (250lb - the intermediate standard for a 165lb trainee) a common point for a Novice to stall at? Let me know if if I'm still not making myself clear.

[Mark Rippetoe]

I may have, sorry. It's good that you understand, it appears as though others don't.

[Mark Rippetoe]

Astro, your post asked "So, the way the strength standards tables work is you should get to about Intermediate weight before you need Intermediate programming?" I posted a link to a thread where I criticized the acumen of a guy who asked if a level of training advancement corresponds to a particular strength level; of course it doesn't, and had you read PPST you'd know why. The strength standards are supposed to be used as a general guideline for someone training for general strength and conditioning, not competitive lifting.

And if you've only gained 3k instead of 6k, as my admittedly too-hasty reading of your post missed, then here's the deal: stalling is a combination of genetics and adherence to the program. More often than not it corresponds to the general guidelines provided by the Standards, sometimes it doesn't, especially when you don't eat and train like you want to get strong.

Maybe I'm expecting too much, but you're supposed to know that guidelines are applied generally, that their value lies in the trends they indicate, and that mitigating factors will affect how well they apply. Why would a set of generalized standards be applied specifically to any one particular situation?