Reply With QuoteThe fact that this guy struggles will elementary school fractions is probably a big tip-off.
Member
Submitted for Discussion
This was linked all over my FB page by various well-meaning individuals.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDEa7Lh1HJ8
Member
The fact that this guy struggles will elementary school fractions is probably a big tip-off.
Member
Submitted for Discussion
After I began training with a SS instructor I did a search of the Strong First forum to see if SS had ever been discussed. I noted that when asked about it Pavel's comments struck me as gracious and complimentary towards Rip's work.
I will extend him the same courtesy.
Jim
Member
If there is this benefit he speaks of in large contrast in loadings, you would probably also get it with the contrast between volume and intensity days. Maybe?
Member
Nah, it's all about the 25 lb bumpers!Originally Posted by allent
Member
There are some interesting topics here.
1. He seems to hint that, when microloading (or "sneaking up on"), the trainee does not stay "tight" and use proper technique for the in-between weights. This is nonsense. Sloppy technique can only be used on light weights. A trainee would have to use proper technique at the microloaded weight.
2. KBs are Pavel's SHTICK. He isn't selling barbell training. He's selling kettlebell training. As such, his programming recommendations are limited to Kettlebell availability - simple as that. He has no other programming tools available other than accumulating volume before getting to the next weight.
3. The body adapts to the load imposed, whether that is a small percentage, or 12.5% (whatever, it's a lot!!!). He even mumbles the name of some guy stating that increases of 2% was the smallest that could be felt. So, if a small percentage can be felt (and therefore adapted to), why not use it. There isn't anything wrong with small jumps or large jumps. The key is progression in load over time, proportional to the trainee's ability, and when appropriate. Microloading is just another tool in the toolbox. When it is possible to make 5lb or 10lb increases, make 5lb or 10lb increases. When only a 1lb increase is possible, make a 1lb increase. It doesn't make sense to load a squat with single pound increases - it WILL work, but it will be inefficient and take a very long time. At the other end of the spectrum, 10lb increases on the press aren't sustainable.
4. This isn't germane to the discussion, but I got a kick out of the "lay on the floor as if you were five years old & watching Saturday morning cartoons" routine.
5. The whole discussion of "In Russia, you never find MEN using washers" is another bunch of horseshit. Cool. Why are these assholes being put up on a pedestal? Let's consider some things, shall we?
What is the training advancement of these "MEN" using nothing less than 10kg increases on a lift? Are they beginners? Intermediates? Somehow, I don't think we're talking about Average Ivan futzing around in the local People's Gym. What works for advanced lifters is not necessarily the best for beginners or intermediates.
Am I less of a man because I put a couple of washers on the barbell when I press? I'm progressing, aren't I? An increase of 1lb/week is 52lbs/year (this math might be lost on him). Other than some pompous windbag, an annual increase of 52lbs on a lift where microloading is appropriate is great. It is a tool in the strength toolbox to continue progression. Progression tops everything else.
This is nothing more than shtick trying to glorify the kettlebell and peddle his StrongFirst training program. (Soviet lifters used big weight increases, KBs have big (relatively) weight increases, therefore, KBs are fucking great.)
6. It is amazing how much bullshit is accepted in the field of strength & fitness. No mathematician or engineer (even a highly esteemed RUSSIAN engineer) would suggest for a student to do a bunch of algebra and then jump into calculus followed by another jump into differential equations (I'm talking about the level of skill to perform in those areas). First you learn y = mx + b, then you learn to solve more complex polynomials. And then the concept of the limit is introduced, and then the derivative. And then the integral. And then using those to solve ODEs. Acquiring strength works identically. Then again, this concept might be beyond the guy struggling with the concept of 4/32 = 0.125 (lol, whatever, it's a lot!!).
Member
There is a bit of truth in everything.
Progrressive overload can be achieved using several methods as practical priograming explains, training advancement will require more complex methiods of achieving overload in an athlete.
His explanations seem less than perfect, but I will attribute that to english not being his first language.
Member
Yes.
Member
I'm not much interested in the training related content of the video, but I am fascinated that so many men respond positively to being treated like weak, moronic eunuchs (based off the small sample from the youtube response).
I found the video boneheaded and supremely condescending.
Last edited by John Hanley; 07-10-2015 at 12:35 PM.
Starting Strength Coach
I do not agree with Pavel's argument here for various reasons, but this dismissal is overly simplistic. Having read his various books (authored and co-authored) on barbell training/powerlifting and seen some of the material available at his certifications (he does a barbell, kettlebell, and BW certification as part of StrongFirst), Pavel's mentality is that there are universal principles to develop maximal strength that can be applied to any tool. The kettlebell is just the one that made him famous.
He is also not the first big-name lifter to suggest that micro-loading is for wussies. I've seen this proposed by lifters at JTS, T-Nation, and other big-name barbell training sites. If we're going to disagree, let's challenge the content, not the source.
Posting Permissions