What is the benefit of TM over HLM?

[PrimalFish]

Its sometimes said that TM is a very aggressive program for people who want to be lifters. A program that can really run you into the ground, so you're not a younger guy with a lot of testosterone, maybe you should reconsider attempting it.

But for all of it's challenges, what is the benefit over HLM, an "easier" program? It seems both have you increasing by the same amounts on a weekly basis.

[Michael Wolf]

While both are templates more than specific "Do exactly this" type programs, TM usually refers to somewhat more specific guidelines than HLM. The basic idea of TM revolves around a higher volume/medium intensity day at the start of the week, a lower volume and lower intensity day mid-week, and a lower volume/high intensity day at the end of the week; and in its most basic form, you hit a PR for the prescribed # of reps on that end-of-week Intensity Day.

Whereas HLM is a much more general template that can be used with a very large variety of set and rep ranges, along with a variety of scheduled "planned PRs."

Things get a little messy, however, because you can also easily adopt the basic TM ideas and structure for longer periods, too. Comrade Campitelli and I have discussed a version he has used with his lifter Mune - who has competed nationally and internationally in the IPF - wherein Week 1 is Volume Week (with a tiny bit of intensity to preserve the skill), and Week 2 is Intensity Week (with a dash of volume to not totally detrain on it before returning to higher volume the following week).

I've personally played with TM-based templates that keep the basic TM structure of High Volume/Medium Intensity, Low Volume/Low Intensity, Low Volume/High Intensity but jigger it to aim for a PR every second Friday.
i.e. for a lifter whose 5RM is 405, 3RM is 430, 2RM is 450 and 1RM is 470:
W1D1: 375x5x5 - hard volume day
W1D2: 275x5x2 - very easy light day
W1D3: 410x3x2 - easier intensity day

W2D1: 340x5x5 - easier but still plenty of work volume day
W2D2: 295x5x2 - harder but still easy light day
W2D2: 455x2x2-3 - new PR doubles

To come back to your original question: The TM "as written" with its 5x5 @ 85-90% of 5RM on Monday in squat and press, and then a new 5RM deadlift, and then a new 1-5RM every Friday, can really run you into the ground. But if successful, it produces a weekly PR, which is a pretty big deal.

But it gets messy because you can use the basic ideas of the TM I wrote about above, to also design less brutal, less aggressive, slower progressing programming, and it's just a slightly different way of doing so than HLM, because it kind of becomes more like a general template that would be "MLH" than a specific prescription to "do this each week."

[stef]

But for all of it's challenges, what is the benefit over HLM, an "easier" program? It seems both have you increasing by the same amounts on a weekly basis.

TM is initially "harder" because of the two heavy days per week. But HLM != HLM. I mean, HLM is something you add days to as part of building the program, working up to more than one H and M, particularly when you're using it with an OL emphasis.

Examples are in PP for any of you who haven't read the program and don't know what I am talking about.

[PrimalFish]

To come back to your original question: The TM "as written" with its 5x5 @ 85-90% of 5RM on Monday in squat and press, and then a new 5RM deadlift, and then a new 1-5RM every Friday, can really run you into the ground. But if successful, it produces a weekly PR, which is a pretty big deal.

I think I'm still a bit confused as to why an early intermediate would choose TM "as written" over the "basic" HLM. Doesn't HLM give you weekly PRs a well? My understanding is that the basic TM and HLM programs both have a trainee aiming for weekly PRs of the same weight increases. I am wondering then: why would a trainee willingly choose to do a harder program (TM), where recovery may be an issue, only to get the same results as an "easier" program (HLM)?

Maybe I am misunderstanding something here and TM actually does have a trainee progressing quicker then HLM. Then I'd see the logic for using this harder program because you're progressing more quickly.

[Michael Wolf]

Doesn't HLM give you weekly PRs a well?

Please re-write this line in a way that confirms to me that we haven't wasted our time here.

[shanewilcox]

Maybe I am misunderstanding something here and TM actually does have a trainee progressing quicker then HLM. Then I'd see the logic for using this harder program because you're progressing more quickly.

I have a perpetual motion machine I can sell you for just 5000 bitcoins. PM me.

[Michael Wolf]

Be nice now, Shane.

[PrimalFish]

Please re-write this line in a way that confirms to me that we haven't wasted our time here.

I don’t know, I must really be missing something both major and obvious here. Not trying to waste your time and I do appreciate your help.

I know TM and HLM are both customizable...

But I thought a popular version of TM has a trainee going for a new PR every Friday, so six weeks of squat PRs on Fridays may look like 320x5, 325x5, 330x5, 335x5, 340x5, 345x5.

And I thought a popular version of HLM has a trainee going for a new PR every Monday, so six weeks of squat PRs on Mondays may look like 320x5, 325x5, 330x5, 335x5, 340x5, 345x5.

They are both 3 day a week programs trying to improve the same lifts. TM is has been said to be the much more challenging program where recovery can be an issue, so I was wondering why someone would use it when HLM gives similar results without the same recovery risks.

But, I must be saying something incorrect here; I’ll think about it more and try to figure it out.

[PrimalFish]

Ok I think I see my error. You're not going to be able to put 260 pounds on your squat in 52 weeks on an intermediate program. I was thinking too short term and I need to learn more about how these programs are used long-term.

[shanewilcox]

Be nice now, Shane.

Sorry, Primalfish (and Michael), that was a little gauche. Nevertheless, I think it made the point, if unkindly.