Member
questions following Woods podcast
I listened to your podcast with Tom Woods today and found it both informative and humorous. After listening, I started looking through your website and I had a few questions on where to go from my current workout and development status.
I'm 40, 5'8", 185 lb., have been lifting fairly consistently since about 2000, and in the past 5-8 years have predominantly been following Joe Defranco programs. My main lift maxes are approximately 205 for bench and 245 for squat (those are estimates from max lift calculators, as I workout on my own at home and don't typically go for 1RM).
I'm not working out for any reason other than to stay in shape, and I want to optimize my strength and fitness to any extent possible. Based on this, I was wondering what you'd recommend----
1. Would you consider those lift maxes to be sub-par for the amount of time I've been lifting (i.e., would you consider me a "novice" or "intermediate")?
2. What program/resource of yours would you recommend I follow (I would follow online training but don't have the finances for it right now)?
3. What do you recommend from a "conditioning" standpoint beyond the strength training sessions?
TMPHBITEU
1. I would. Novices who have trained with our methods for 5 months are stronger than this. And I see no deadlift number.
2. You are a novice, as you will understand when you read the books.
3. Are you "out of condition"? If you do the program, you will understand that strength training also provides conditioning.
Member
Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe
Thank you Mark. A bit more background---I've been seeing a nutritionist and have my bodyfat % down to about 12 (initially from about 19). I'd like to continue to maintain that (if not lower it a bit). From a conditioning standpoint, I wouldn't say I'm "out of condition," but I'd like to maintain a conditioning level where I can play a pickup basketball game on demand, or be able to compete in a 5k run without being gassed out.
Do you think these goals are not possible to achieve simultaneously with improving strength numbers?
TMPHBITEU
Why would you think that a strength training program would make you unable to complete a basketball game or a 5k run?
Member
I've run 5ks at over 20% body fat. And other than hip pain from arthritis, I could easily play pickup basketball. The biggest issue that I see coming is that you are going to be stuck in a mindset of 12% body fat and an accompanying resistance to depart from said bf level. Because of that, you may have issues running a program that requires you to gain some body fat for optimal strength gains even if the outcome would be better performance in basketball.
Member
As I've researched more on this site, it seems like the training I've been doing over the past 5-10 years has been more along the lines of "intermediate" training, since the Defranco-type programs are based on a philosophy of conjugate method of training (i.e., multiple goals, like strength, speed, power, etc. are trained all within a given week), and increases in load to the "big" lifts like the bench press, deadlift, and squat take place over longer periods of time than 48-72 hours (as in the SS "novice" approach). On another thread in these forums, I believe Matt Reynolds said that Defranco programs would be an intermediate program.
If I've been following this type of approach and have only seen modest increases to my lift numbers over 5-10 years, does that mean that I've lost the opportunity for the bigger jumps in lift numbers that the SS "novice" approach would present? Perhaps stated differently, if I've been following what might be considered an "intermediate" program for 5-10 years, and my lift numbers haven't increased considerably when given more than 48-72 hours (and more like a week) to recover between each big lift, what would be the basis for thinking that less recovery time between lifts would have a better outcome?
TMPHBITEU
What is a better outcome?
Starting Strength Coach
That depends on whether you've reached a point of adaptation that would no longer make you a novice, which we define as the ability to recover from and adapt to a stress within 48 to 72 hours. Odds are, based on your numbers, you still could run a linear progression with such recovery parameters.
Could be a lot of things. You could be giving up on lifts too easily (this is way more common than you might think). Your form might be shit. You may not be eating enough. You may not be sleeping enough. You may not be resting enough between sets. If these are true, you're not going to sufficiently recover in 48, 72, or 144 hours.Perhaps stated differently, if I've been following what might be considered an "intermediate" program for 5-10 years, and my lift numbers haven't increased considerably when given more than 48-72 hours (and more like a week) to recover between each big lift, what would be the basis for thinking that less recovery time between lifts would have a better outcome?
I'm not sure which of these explains your predicament. But I suspect that, if you used good form, rested enough between sets, ate enough, slept enough, learned how to grind through tough reps, and didn't have something clearly wrong with your physiology (e.g. low testosterone, abnormal metabolism, one leg, etc.), you would see window of novice gains on a linear progression.
Member
Better outcome meaning more substantial jumps in my main lift numbers---i.e., what is the basis to say that less recovery time between main lifts will bring greater increases to my main lift numbers?
TMPHBITEU
I'd have to see the program you followed. I'd have to know the incremental increases you were attempting, and how they accumulated. And I'd have to know whether or not you actually loaded 5 pounds more on the bar and tried to lift it.
Posting Permissions
