HLM squat: restarting the fives cycle after 'running it out' - weight for L & M days?

[Samuelsson]

Hi,

I have both books (SS and PP) but yet I can’t seem to wrap my head around this...

Suppose you’re doing HLM and stall squats at the 3x5 stage (3 sets of 5 reps) for 2 heavy days in a row,
so next time you do 1 top set and add 2 back up sets @ 90% of the top set until you fail the 1x5 top set again, you then leave the fahves for 2 triples, then 3 doubles, then 5 to 3 singles, always keeping the 2 back up sets @ 90% of the top set on H(eavy) and the same 90% is for the M(edium) day for 3x5.

This is similar to ‘running it out’ as described in TM section of the PP-book.

After this you take a reduction in training load, say 90% (or perhaps resume the weight at which you first stalled the 3x5?), and start back again with sets of fahve. You should be able to get the weight you faltered at previously.

Question 1: to be clear, does the cycle start again with 3x5 > 1x5 + 2 back of sets @ 90% > 2x3 + 2 b.o. sets > 3x2 + 2 b.o. sets > and so on…
Or do you skip the 3x5 and immediately resume with 1x5 + 2 back of sets @ 90%?

Question 2: What weight will you use for the ~90% on medium day (and ~80% on light day) from then on? Wouldn’t a recalculated 90% of the new 3x5 (or 1x5) starting weight be so ‘light’ (as compared to what the trainee has been lifting in the previous weeks) that detraining would occur?

extra information:
Male, 32 y.o., 6.15 feet, 90kg,back to SS since end of last year, slow lp untill may, was unable to train consistently during the summer, after a few weeks I'm now almost back to where i left in may and starting to fail my 3x5 squats on H-day at 135kg (297 lb) unsure how to proceed. food intake ok but needs to improve, sleep limited by 2 todlers.

[Ben Patterson]

Toddlers are tough, I'm there too.

Anyway, I don't like "running it out" on HLM. What I would do is set up alternate rep schemes, start with 2 and add as needed. For example:

Week 1: 3x5
Week 2: 4x3
Later add Week 3: 5x2
Repeat

This is for heavy day, your light and medium days can stay based off of your last 3x5 H workout.

This is only one of many ways to structure periodization in an HLM setup.

Lastly, at over 6 feet tall and 90 kg I would gain some weight, This is likely contributing to your issues.

[Samuelsson]

Interesting.

I think i see the added value of your method: I guess the 'cycle-time' between leaving 3x5 and resuming 3x5 again is likely gonna be shorter compared to the 'cycle-time' using the ‘running it out’ method because 4x3 > 5x2 is harder than 2x3 > 3x2 > 5x1 > 3x1 + back of sets…?

If so this means less of a weight gap between 3x5’s when you resume them and thus also a significantly smaller weight drop of the 90% on medium days compared to resuming 3x5 using running it out...

[Ben Patterson]

Your analysis is right.

Also think about how long a workout of 3x2 or 5x1 followed by 2x5 would be. That is probably way more stress than you need or could recover from effectively. It essentially defeats the purpose of running an HLM.

The H day just needs to be enough stress to disrupt homeostasis and result in positive adaptation. The L day maintains motor patterns while fatigue dissipates, and M day prevents detraining during the time where you're still unable to exhibit the adaptation from the H day. So L and M do not drive progress, Contrary to TM where progress is driven on V day and I day.

Running it out (RIO) works for I day in TM partly because of the progress driving ability of V day. By doing the RIO with back offs in one day you're essentially combining these two very taxing workouts into one monster session, albeit with slightly reduced volume.

Rotating your weekly rep schemes will retain the progress driving 5s while allowing you to work in some higher intensity work and still recover from it.

That could have been organized better, but it expands my reasoning a bit more.

As far as "cycle time" is concerned, RIO would be more fluid, you make the change warranted by performance. In my suggested method the cycle time is fixed. For example:

Week 1: 295x5x3
Week 2: 305x3x4
Week 3: 315x2x5
Week 4: 300x5x3
Week 5: 310x3x4
Etc.

Let me know if you have questions.

[autumnal]

Thanks for that clear explanation, Ben. I had the same question as Samuelsson, which now seems put to rest.

[Overtrained]

Week 1: 295x5x3
Week 2: 305x3x4
Week 3: 315x2x5
Week 4: 300x5x3
Week 5: 310x3x4
Etc.

Let me know if you have questions.

Ok, so once you have failed 5x3 for a given weight, you will then progress by repeating the three week cycle you've described for as long as possible.

Have you, or anyone else, tried deloading before you revert to 3x5 again, to push 3x5 to higher weights than previously for more than one week ?
Or is there insufficient fatigue, after two higher intensity H workouts, to require a deload in practice, such that in practice you would just detrain ?

Separately, i thought one of the reasons for the M workout was to provide challenging, good quality volume to embed the additional strength from the H workout, rather than to just avoid detraining ?

[Ben Patterson]

Ok, so once you have failed 5x3 for a given weight, you will then progress by repeating the three week cycle you've described for as long as possible.

If you fail a 3x5 you'd continue to your 4x3 as usual and attempt the same weight again the next time you reach 3x5. If you miss it again then implement the 5x2 after the 4x3. If you miss it again, adjust the load down slightly and continue as usual.

Have you, or anyone else, tried deloading before you revert to 3x5 again, to push 3x5 to higher weights than previously for more than one week ?
Or is there insufficient fatigue, after two higher intensity H workouts, to require a deload in practice, such that in practice you would just detrain ?

The deload is effecivetly pre-programmed into a HLM setup.

Do you mean start with a slightly lower weight that what you failed on for 3x5? For example is you missed at 295, start at 275 or 280 and work up from there in the new program. Yes, I recommend you do that.

Separately, i thought one of the reasons for the M workout was to provide challenging, good quality volume to embed the additional strength from the H workout, rather than to just avoid detraining ?

Think about that, isn't "embed the additional strength" another way of saying it prevents detraining?

[Samuelsson]

Ben, thanks for your clear explanation, greatly appreciated!

[Overtrained]

If you fail a 3x5 you'd continue to your 4x3 as usual and attempt the same weight again the next time you reach 3x5. If you miss it again then implement the 5x2 after the 4x3. If you miss it again, adjust the load down slightly and continue as usual.

Do you mean start with a slightly lower weight that what you failed on for 3x5? For example is you missed at 295, start at 275 or 280 and work up from there in the new program. Yes, I recommend you do that.
.

In practice, do you find it is generally necessary to deload slightly when you return to 3x5 for the next cycle ?

The deload is effecivetly pre-programmed into a HLM setup.

Can you explain this ?
Isn't hlm simply weekly progression ?

Think about that, isn't "embed the additional strength" another way of saying it prevents detraining?

Poor choice of words on my part.
Comparing hlm with TM, my understanding was that volume drives intensity. Volume is around 85-90% intensity.

Isn't the same true for hlm ?

[Ben Patterson]

In practice, do you find it is generally necessary to deload slightly when you return to 3x5 for the next cycle ?

Not in the setup I presented. You're essentially progressing your 3x5 weight every 2-3 weeks.

Can you explain this ?
Isn't hlm simply weekly progression ?

It is weekly progression. I explained the purpose of each day already. But I'll try to put it more plainly. The light day IS the deload.

I think you''re confusing a deload with a reset. A deload refers to a period of time in which training stress is reduced in order to recover from prior stress and thus adapt. A reset would be a small reduction in the work set weight that subsequently follows the same or slightly faster progression than the last time the lifter used said weights for the same set & rep scheme.

Poor choice of words on my part.
Comparing hlm with TM, my understanding was that volume drives intensity. Volume is around 85-90% intensity.

Isn't the same true for hlm ?

In TM yes volume drives intensity, and to a lesser extent intensity drives volume.

This is not true of an HLM. The Heavy day is the driver of progress.