"Your percents are stupid!"

[Alec Leamas]

Excerpt from article posted on Elitefts, by MBA Meathead, targeted at beginner and intermediate lifters:

-Go to the weight room two to four days a week and hit one or two major compound movements (working up to a max set of 1-4 reps on each) along with three or four accessory movements (working up to 3 sets of 6-8 reps on each) with a high level of intensity.
--For compound movements, increase the weight when you can do a final set of 4 reps.
--For accessory movements, increase the weight when you can get all 3 sets of 8 reps.

-Take in one to two grams of protein per pound of bodyweight and choose protein over carbohydrates when picking food.

-Period. That’s it.

What do you think about this approach? I guess this is what a lot of people do (and did, especially before the advent of internet and the unlimited amounts of information being available).

I like the idea, but I don't think it would work as well for myself, for different reasons.

[Kyle Schuant]

It's okay. They're absolutely correct that novices and intermediates don't need periodisation.

4 reps might be a bit low for novices, since when they go up in weight they might not have enough reps to do much with, it'll slow progress. But Elitefts tends not to focus on novices much. I strongly doubt the authour's had much experience of training a bunch of novices, and older or smaller female lifters.

The basic principles are sound. There are many ways to do what SS does, but these other ways won't deviate much from the principles of SS. At least twice a week for most movements, some sort of squat, some sort of push, some sort of pull, some sort of hip hinge, doing 10-25 total reps with barbell stuff, maybe on the higher end for legs stuff, the lower for upper body stuff, and in every workout do more weight, or more reps, or more sets than you did before. Start easy and build up. If you want to get bigger, eat more, especially protein. It's not so different.

I think you're focusing on the differences rather than the similarities, it reminds me of when Dan John and Rip had their conversation and mocked the question about DJ's front squat recommendation vs Rip's back squat recommendation. Each has their reasons for the difference, but really nothing horrific and injurious would happen if a beginner were to exchange them.

[Alec Leamas]

It's okay. They're absolutely correct that novices and intermediates don't need periodisation.

4 reps might be a bit low for novices, since when they go up in weight they might not have enough reps to do much with, it'll slow progress. But Elitefts tends not to focus on novices much. I strongly doubt the authour's had much experience of training a bunch of novices, and older or smaller female lifters.

The basic principles are sound. There are many ways to do what SS does, but these other ways won't deviate much from the principles of SS. At least twice a week for most movements, some sort of squat, some sort of push, some sort of pull, some sort of hip hinge, doing 10-25 total reps with barbell stuff, maybe on the higher end for legs stuff, the lower for upper body stuff, and in every workout do more weight, or more reps, or more sets than you did before. Start easy and build up. If you want to get bigger, eat more, especially protein. It's not so different.

I think you're focusing on the differences rather than the similarities, it reminds me of when Dan John and Rip had their conversation and mocked the question about DJ's front squat recommendation vs Rip's back squat recommendation. Each has their reasons for the difference, but really nothing horrific and injurious would happen if a beginner were to exchange them.

I think the main problem with the approach described in the article is adherence and discipline. A lot of people are helped by strict adherance to a program, rather than a freer approach.

[Kyle Schuant]

It's true. On the other hand, when people reach their inevitable stalls - whether soft or hard stalls - a strict programme leaves them lost and confused. For evidence, see the Q&A, Training etc forums on this site.

Extraordinarily few people achieve even the limits of their novice progression without some in-person coaching, so really the details of the programme aren't desperately important in terms of adherence. So long as it's not something totally moronic like "load your bodyweight on the bar and squat it for 100 reps... you can break it up into a few sets if you need to."

[gzt]

I think he's right in that people who direct beginning lifters to programs utilizing a %age are just being silly, not the least because a beginner can add weight to their lifts all the time, so a percentage is irrelevant after every workout. So, yeah, this sort of program is probably pretty adequate. I'd suggest something with a little more volume on the main lifts and focus on the main lifts, but that's just my preference for beginners (as opposed to his apparent philosophy of main lift + assistance), this will certainly get the job done and much better than stupid percentage based programs for beginners.

[colwyn]

The nice thing about the assistance work is that it will get people bigger sooner, while at the expense of quicker strength. The majority of people who get into lifting want to look good and get big, whether they will ever admit to it or not. There are very few who, at the initial stages, are only concerned with getting strong with complete disregard for aesthetics.

[Patrick Stroup]

I hate to sound mean, I am not in the business of training people.

But I like suggestions like he gave. Kinda goes with the "figure it out" suggestion and I think it makes you a better lifter if you just stay honest with yourself and focus on getting better session to session or week to week or month to month. Hell even competition to competition. I think spending more time on spreadsheets hurt me more than helped do anything.

[gzt]

Definitely, I don't think Doug Young was very good at using Excel.