Looking at other programs through Practical Programing Principles

[poplawsj]

Hi everyone this is my first post.

**About me (you can skip it if you don't give a RA)*******

DOB: 06/05/1986 (I’m 24 right now)
Weight: currently 191 lbs. (ranges from 180 to 190)
Height: 5'7"
Deadlift: 500 pounds
Squat: 415 pounds (high bar ass to grass style)
Bench: 280 pounds (it sucks I know)
Standing Military Press: 170 pounds
Chin-up Max: 25 reps
Pull-ups: 90 pounds + body weight
Training years: been training seriously and consistently since 1999
Experience: I've competed in Power Lifting. Was a career firefighter for a short time, went to college for Sports Medicine and Health Science.
Quirks: I over think things ALOT, and don't read between lines well.
************************************************** ***************
MY QUESTION:

I have read Mark Rippetoe's Practical Programming book and feel like I learned more from it than I did from 4 years of college.

How do the principles in PP apply to Jim Wendler's 5/3/1?

Let me be clear this is not a "which is better TM or 5/3/1", "which should I do 5/3/1 or TM" or even "What are the differences and similarities between TM and 5/3/1"

The principles in PP are universal and should apply to any good training program. I'm asking with regard to 5/3/1 b/c I have experience using 5/3/1 and b/c I understand that Jim Wendler and Mark Rippetoe hold each other in high regard. So it seems like a good program to try and tease out the practical applications of the principles taught in Mark's book.

I know both promote hard work with no magic bullets, Consistency and the big compound lifts. However when we look at their use of reps, sets and volume to disrupt homeostasis and allow for recovery they have obviously different approaches.

What I’m interested in understanding what the underlying commonality is. Why does 5/3/1's progress work and why do the programs in TM work? I here others say b/c they follow a logical progress with each part setting you up for the next, but I’m having trouble seeing what that really is when applying it to training.

I have searched the board several times but haven’t found anything that helps me figure it out, though the discussion comparing 5/3/1 to TM was interesting.

[ZKP]

The basic commonality are the characteristics you just mentioned. Train, recover, train again....PP tells us this and gives examples of variation in the training stimulus itself, as well as info on balancing said stimulus with recovery, using a number of theoretical instances as examples. One may be "optimal" for certain individuals based on recovery factors and the necessary stress to drive a training response, but that's it. Both are basic templates and have to be played with to be optimal for you. Volume, Intensity and frequency are not static quantities in a program, or rather shouldn't be if you want to make the best gains. This has been said before in a lot of different ways, but choose the program that fits your lifestyle, goals and even preferences in a way that is most conducive to long term consistency. If you're a beginner (and you're not) just stick with one proven thing because you don't know what you're talking about yet. It doesn't really matter which one at first because in time, with some trial and error, what is "more optimal" for you will come to the surface. As you get better at juggling these things around and judging whats best for you, I've found that the changes you make are very subtle, hardly the earth shattering shit beginners come up with when they make "their own program". Both can be optimal starting points for beginners or advanced, depending on an individuals variation and needs. What do you think?

[poplawsj]

WOW I DIDN'T GET FLAMED!!!

This response is great and it gives me a lot of perspective thank you.

However, one thing I would like some opinions on is this interplay in volume, intensity and frequency.

The TM has a higher volume and intensity than 5/3/1 for example. TM has 15 sets at 90% on volume day alone (which is the bulk of the program). Where as 5/3/1 only has 3 working sets at percentages below 90% (since the working percentages are based off of 90% of your 1rm).

Additionally the variation in volume over a full cycle of 5/3/1 seems irrelevant even when you take into account that the last set could go as high as 10+ reps.

In the TM the Volume day seems to be what makes you stronger and the Intensity day seems only to be there to determine what weight to use for the next volume day and to keep you motivated by giving you a PR.

Even though I've been training seriously and studying training since I was 12 the actual workings of this stuff still elude me and that's frustrating.

It's like Yes I know how a combustion engine works, you need gas, air and an ignition source in the right proportions, but how is it two things as different as a 2 stroke and a 4 stroke both work off these common principles? (and yes I do understand how a 2 and 4 stroke engine actually work off these common principles)

How is it each program uses completely different proportions of volume, intensity and frequency but still produce results for most people regardless of training experience whether optimally or not (that is an assumption of course)

Is it simply b/c they push the individual to achieve more each cycle without overtaxing recovery? O.o;; OMG did I just have an epiphany?

There’s a stimulus. It could be volume, Intensity or some combination but it’s enough to disrupt homeostasis and force adaptation, but the frequency of said work isn’t so often that it prevents enough recovery to again reach a new PR within the frequency cycle.

So looking at 5/3/1 there’s a hell of a lot more time to recover and the disruption comes from hitting a PR each week in reps at a different weight. (Which does sound like more of an advanced program as far as frequency and progression go)

In the TM repeatedly using straight sets of a heavy enough weight cause the disruption and it’s fine tuned for an intermediate (who by Mark’s definition should be able to recover enough within a week’s time to hit a new PR).

Understanding that recovery doesn’t have to be complete but needs to be enough to do more with the current workout than the past one?!

WOW I DO OVERTHINK SHIT!

[ZKP]

Yeah, but that's how you get good at telling what you need. The optimal interplay of those three factors of a stimulus can only be found for an individual, on an individual basis. That's your job, because no template can do it for you. It's not possible. Trial and error my friend. TM, 5/3/1...They both can work because people make them work allowing and working withing the parameters of their lives and individual needs. This is the fun (?) part, making it work, playing with it, and seeing just what you can do. Good luck!

[62jeroen]

Big difference between the two programs is that TM is aimed at fastest possible strength gains for an intermediate, given optimal recovery conditions. 5/3/1 aims at slow and steady. I also heard Jim Wendler state in a seminar video that he loves the book starting strength, would recommend it to anybody above every other book. If you had to choose one book, choose starting strength. On PP he is not so fond, says he'd like Mark to be more black & white (don't know what he means by that).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZOAN940Hr0
4:30 and 5:25

[JPC]

The biggest difference, in terms of how PP explains the different needs of beginner, intermediate, advanced(which is what sets PP apart from every other training book), is that 5/3/1 uses monthly progression, which is geared toward the needs of someone with the advanced label(closer to genetic potential, so progresses slower). TM is weekly progression, for an intermediate.

[Les Hahn]

I agree that 5/3/1 more fits into the "advanced" category of programming as explained in PPST2. People can use it as a beginner too, but you might not advance as quickly as you could if you did SS and something like the TM instead for the beginner and intermediate stages.

I think it would be more fun to compare something that is more of an odd duck than 5/3/1, but people get excellent results off it. Let's look at Westside's system, or in a more generic sense, conjugate tranining. Here you have people using it from beginner to advanced and even elite. You work up to a daily max, once for a bench press type movement, and the other for a squat/dl type movement. You always go "balls to the walls", but you rotate exercises instead of intensity. Since you are using a daily max, I imagine there is some auto-regulation in there. If you aren't feeling hot, your daily max might be lower.

This system also has 2 speed days, where you use between 50-60% of your 1RM on a squat/dl and bench type movements. This is sometimes periodized a little bit, since some systems do 1 week at 50%, the next at 55%, and the last at 60%. You then repeat that again in the next cycle.

So how does a system, where you change the exercises and not the intensity, play into PPST2? I am only up to about page 60 reading it, so I don't know. I figured it would be worth asking, and it could be something fun to talk about.

[LimieJosh]

There are models discussed for use above the novice stage where the stress applied to the system is modified by choosing different exercises (bench vs incline vs OHP)

EDIT: Actually, now I think about I dont remember whether that was specifically discussed in PP or whether it was part of one of the Starr articles on this site.

[poplawsj]

I agree that 5/3/1 more fits into the "advanced" category of programming as explained in PPST2. People can use it as a beginner too, but you might not advance as quickly as you could if you did SS and something like the TM instead for the beginner and intermediate stages.

I think it would be more fun to compare something that is more of an odd duck than 5/3/1, but people get excellent results off it. Let's look at Westside's system, or in a more generic sense, conjugate tranining. Here you have people using it from beginner to advanced and even elite. You work up to a daily max, once for a bench press type movement, and the other for a squat/dl type movement. You always go "balls to the walls", but you rotate exercises instead of intensity. Since you are using a daily max, I imagine there is some auto-regulation in there. If you aren't feeling hot, your daily max might be lower.

This system also has 2 speed days, where you use between 50-60% of your 1RM on a squat/dl and bench type movements. This is sometimes periodized a little bit, since some systems do 1 week at 50%, the next at 55%, and the last at 60%. You then repeat that again in the next cycle.

So how does a system, where you change the exercises and not the intensity, play into PPST2? I am only up to about page 60 reading it, so I don't know. I figured it would be worth asking, and it could be something fun to talk about.

Rippetoe talks about having speed days which are alternated with the Intensity day on Fridays of his TM in PP.

Unfortunately I don't know or understand much about Westside Methods. My understanding...and correct me please if I'm wrong...Is that you pick exercises that emphasize your weak link in your main lift. So a powerlifter who benches equipped will most likely Do board presses or some other end range movement as his primary lift. He will stick with that lift until he see's improvement then go work on another week area with a main compound lift that emphasizes it, bringing up the weak link in that lift. The lifter would also have speed days incorporated to his training much like what is discussed in PP.

So really there doesn't seem to be that much difference, you’re still focusing on a lift using the principles of volume and intensity and frequency to cause improvement.

However, by changing the exercise you are able to maintain a higher level of intensity for longer. This is probably b/c when you change an exercise there is a new motor patter to learn. You are effectively a novice again for a little while for that new movement and your max for that lift initially isn't close enough to your genetic potential to severely tax your recovery for what the exercise is worth. Just like how a novice can go and max out every workout with a new movement you would be able to do something similar until you gained enough experience with a new lift. At that point you'd have made gains improved your weak link and would move on to a different exercise.

So even though it doesn't seem like it you are still cycling from low intensity to high intensity.

Like I said though I really don't know anything about WS training and I’m probably totally off base. I would love to hear what someone who's dedicated a good amount of time to actually following that type of training seriously has to say.

[Tom Campitelli]

There are hints of the Westside approach in the Texas Method. The intensity day suggests the maximum effort work and the volume day has elements of the repetition method. Speed work (dynamic effort) can be subbed in for the intensity day. That's not to say the TM is a mirror of Westside, but there are a few commonalities.

Why does 5/3/1's progress work and why do the programs in TM work?

Do you really not see why? Think in terms of disruption of homeostasis, recovery, and supercompensation.

Is it simply b/c they push the individual to achieve more each cycle without overtaxing recovery? O.o;; OMG did I just have an epiphany?

Oh, wait. It looks like you put that together.

TM has 15 sets at 90% on volume day alone

If you are talking about the basic TM template, it is 11 sets (5 squat, 5 press, 1 deadlift).

How is it each program uses completely different proportions of volume, intensity and frequency but still produce results for most people regardless of training experience whether optimally or not (that is an assumption of course)

Novices can often make progress on programs designed for later stage trainees, but progress is needlessly slow. The TM is designed for early intermediates, while 5/3/1, with its quasi-monthly progress, is probably ideally suited for later stage intermediates.