ICF 5x5?

[AceOf]

What do people around these parts think of ICF 5x5 as a program?

Do you find it to be a valid alternative to Starting Strength? Why or why not?

[hollismb]

I tell you what... How about you tell us the differences between ICF 5X5 and the Starting Strength novice linear progression, and what you think is better, comparable, or worse about it?

[AceOf]

I tell you what... How about you tell us the differences between ICF 5X5 and the Starting Strength novice linear progression, and what you think is better, comparable, or worse about it?

I rather intentionally avoided offering my own thoughts, as I am mostly interested in what this specific community thinks about it. I didn't want to bias discussion one way or the other, but since you asked...

With respect to ICF 5x5, this is what I think is:

Better: I think it may be less "scary" for novices, who are intimidated by more dynamic movements such as the power clean. I believe the psychological aspect does matter to some degree, since oftentimes the best program is simply the one you actually do. I also like that it offers some arm work. Big arms are fun.

Comparable: It included the squat, deadlift, overhead press, and bench press, so it more or less covers many of the same core lifts anyway.

Worse: It's horrifically time-consuming compared to most novice programs, and I'm not convinced that all the accessory lifts are adding much. Barbell curls, sure. Skullcrushers / CGBP, sure. But barbell shrugs? Hyperextensions? I feel like any gains from these are going to pale in comparison to the gains a novice would be making from the deadlifts, bent-over-rows, and so on. There is also a risk of having too much volume overall and stalling early. Sometimes it pays to keep things simple.

Overall, I think it's a solid program in many respects, but maybe a tad excessive.

[ludwig23]

It was a BODYBUILDING ROUTINE. It's not a program. It's a routine, for bodybuilding.

I tried the routine once. As many people has stated (on bb.com original thread), it's pretty much a SL derivative. They question the guy who make the routine and call it his own (Jason, i think) aren't really making a new routine of his own. fun debate, because much routines today was derived from the past, and thing would keep getting better if someone add something nicer and remove some unnecessary stuff. But who cares anyway.

I think the shrug are not needed, really. Hyperextensions are nice. Curls are nice, I did that as "accessory work" anyway LoL.
But the 5x5 benching and skullcrushers on the same day IS A JOKE. Seriously. If you're benching hard with that kind of volume, no freaking way you can push an effective skullcrusher. Or maybe i'm weak.

Edit: i might be terribly wrong, someone correct me if needs be.

[hollismb]

Better: I think it may be less "scary" for novices, who are intimidated by more dynamic movements such as the power clean. I believe the psychological aspect does matter to some degree, since oftentimes the best program is simply the one you actually do. I also like that it offers some arm work. Big arms are fun.

People do seem to be scared of the power clean, despite it having a logical learning progression in the book. But we can't really fault the program for the fact that people are pussies, or can't read a book, can we? Also note that SS includes the deadlift every workout for the first couple weeks, until the deadlift establishes itself well ahead of the squat. It's at this point that power cleans would be introduced as an alternate pulling exercise.

Big arms are indeed fun, but keep in mind that SS also adds chinups into the program after a few more weeks, once the deadlift and power clean are alternated so the deadlift is only done once per week.

Comparable: It included the squat, deadlift, overhead press, and bench press, so it more or less covers many of the same core lifts anyway.

Same lifts, but different amounts of sets, which results in drastically different volume. Each SS workout has a total of 15 working reps per lift (except the deadlift), for a total of 45 squat reps per week, and either 15 or 30 bench and press reps, not counting any accessory work. ICF is a total of 25 reps per session per lift, for a total of 75 working squat reps per week, and a total of either 50 or 25 reps for the bench and press. Somehow, the deadlift stays the same.

With that in mind, if the purpose of running a novice linear progression is to keep adding weight the bar every workout, in order to generate an adequate stress that can be recovered from and adapted to before the next workout, which volume scheme is likely to lead to a necessary programming change sooner than the other? Which one will allow more weight (in manageable increments) to be continually added to the bar each session in order to continue getting stronger, and in which one might excessive volume prevent that from happening?

Worse: It's horrifically time-consuming compared to most novice programs, and I'm not convinced that all the accessory lifts are adding much. Barbell curls, sure. Skullcrushers / CGBP, sure. But barbell shrugs? Hyperextensions? I feel like any gains from these are going to pale in comparison to the gains a novice would be making from the deadlifts, bent-over-rows, and so on. There is also a risk of having too much volume overall and stalling early. Sometimes it pays to keep things simple.

Overall, I think it's a solid program in many respects, but maybe a tad excessive.

Well said, especially in light of the additional volume you'd already be getting from running 5X5.

[Cody]

With that in mind, if the purpose of running a novice linear progression is to keep adding weight the bar every workout, in order to generate an adequate stress that can be recovered from and adapted to before the next workout, which volume scheme is likely to lead to a necessary programming change sooner than the other? Which one will allow more weight (in manageable increments) to be continually added to the bar each session in order to continue getting stronger, and in which one might excessive volume prevent that from happening?

[MBasic]

But the 5x5 benching and skullcrushers on the same day IS A JOKE..

This ! if you are 5x5'ing bench and/or OHP with heavy weights (resting 5-6 min btwn sets) . . .to where your last set or two set is a RPE 9.5 or 10 . . . .I doubt you need any tricep work.

How long you push that w/ progress (heavy 5x5's) depends . . .maybe only over a few months (depends on lifter)

[Skander]

I guess I just don't understand the appeal of the 5x5 beginner programs, except their availability free online. If you can get away with 3 sets of 5, why waste your time doing 2 more? As a beginner, the biggest appeal of SS was how quick I could be in and out of the gym. I feel like 5x5 programs make people feel like its harder work so it must be good, which is one mindset you're trying to get past with beginners ("if going to the gym 3 times a week is good, going every day is even better!")

[Dildo Bolt]

Jason Blaha is a train wreck.

[Shaun]

What do people around these parts think of ICF 5x5 as a program?

Do you find it to be a valid alternative to Starting Strength? Why or why not?

Try it and see for yourself.

I have never done it, but it does seem to be very popular on the internet now. And from looking at it, it seems that it has a lot of "fluff" work that won't really benefit a novice but increase the length of the workouts and put more strain on recovery, and 5x5 doesn't work as well as 3x5 when done multiple times per week.

But it's far better than most options out there.