The Bridge

[perman]

I *think* he's referring to talking about assistance exercises and me saying I don't think they uniquely get you stronger, which I still don't. They make training more productive for some indirectly and help control fatigue, which is what I said years ago and still believe. I'm still not sure what hamburgerfan is talking about, but we'll see...

So not to set you up against Tuscherer, but don't you believe in choosing assistance exercises to target weaknesses? Like having pauses or pins around where the bar path slows the most for instance? Or that an @8 pause squat at the same weight as an @6 squat might give more isometric strength around an important range of motion?

[indigo]

Couple of questions from starting the bridge:

1) Concerning RPEs for a set, are we supposed to let the cumulative fatigue influence the weights we select in later sets ? Or should we use the same weights throughout the set.

E.g. doing the OHP [5@6, 5@7, 5@8] X 4. So say 5@6 = 50kg, 5@7=55kg and 5@8= 57.5kg. But on the last set, 57.5kg may have turned into an @9 because of the previous work done.

2) Am I misinterpreting somehow, as it seems the sessions are incredibly long. With a warmup, just the OHP described above takes around 50 mins, no ?

3) Currently benching is close-grip and then 1-ct paused the next time. The latter really seems to hurt my shoulder. Wondering what might be a sensible substitute ?

Thanks.

Thanks.

[perman]

Couple of questions from starting the bridge:

1) Concerning RPEs for a set, are we supposed to let the cumulative fatigue influence the weights we select in later sets ? Or should we use the same weights throughout the set.

E.g. doing the OHP [5@6, 5@7, 5@8] X 4. So say 5@6 = 50kg, 5@7=55kg and 5@8= 57.5kg. But on the last set, 57.5kg may have turned into an @9 because of the previous work done.

I've always interpreted this is as a license to individualize what you do in a workout, meaning that even though the thumb rule states that you add/subtract 5% for +-1RPE, you can add or subtract fractions of that based on your own opinion/perception/feeling about what would be appropriate. If you think jumping back down to 55 would be too big a jump, you yourself can decide to go down to 56 or 56.5 for instance. If you feel on fire one day, why not train according to that mood? Or if you're dragging, you give yourself the permission to be on the low end of the spectrum. You take ownership of your choices, nothing wrong with training over a spectrum of RPE 7.5-9.5 even though a set might say @8 or @9, the volume is what matters, not getting each individual set exactly right. You titrate and evaluate whether the choice was correct afterwards and use those experiences to guide your later choices.

2) Am I misinterpreting somehow, as it seems the sessions are incredibly long. With a warmup, just the OHP described above takes around 50 mins, no ?

Read Tuscherer saying an appropriate time for an exercise was around 30 minutes, which was around ~10 minute warmups, 20 minute work sets, 3-5 minute breaks for @8+ sets and less for lower RPE sets. If a set takes 1-2 minutes, and you have for instance 5@6,7,8x4, that's 4-7 minutes per @8 set, meaning 16-28 minutes for the main work sets depending on how quick you are. I tend to go 30-45 minutes total depending on the exercise and the RPE, your mileage may vary. If there's a place to shave off time, it's in the warmups and the <@8 sets. I personally have a timer on my phone that I start right after my set, and for @8+ sets I try to start the next set 3-4 minutes later.

3) Currently benching is close-grip and then 1-ct paused the next time. The latter really seems to hurt my shoulder. Wondering what might be a sensible substitute ?

Paused low-angle incline maybe? That should be an exercise accomplishing a similar stress, but the angle tends to matter for shoulder pain.

[George Christiansen]

I've been doing paused squat & deadlift on Medium days of my HLM routine, and notice that they allow me to train fairly hard (subjectively) with relatively light weights.

The fatigue is different -- I recover faster than I would from that level of effort using normal technique & heavier weight.
This allows me to be recovered in time for the subsequent Heavy day.

Probably I could do the same thing with more sets at the same weight, unpaused. But it would take longer.

This. Plus you get to focus on certain parts of technique as well. I do paused (1ct) squats on most of my warm ups to burn the stopping point into my brain.

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

So not to set you up against Tuscherer, but don't you believe in choosing assistance exercises to target weaknesses? Like having pauses or pins around where the bar path slows the most for instance? Or that an @8 pause squat at the same weight as an @6 squat might give more isometric strength around an important range of motion?

I think if pressed, Mike would say that "targeting weaknesses" is theoretical and that the skill transfer of assistance lifts to the competition lift is high when the variations are similar.

[Euby]

My thinking is that the assistance lifts would be of minimal value if they aren't/can't be performed properly and at the right intensity by the lifter. I can see coaching be of great value on those lifts, as opposed to the hobby lifter who really just needs to get more time under the bar with the main lifts at a lower intensity/volume a couple of extra days each week. Could be wrong, and am not making an argument for not doing variations at all.

[Murelli]

This thread has been good, this Training forum has been good. Keep going folks.

I'll leave you with this great article by Dr. Baraki, for you to bear in mind everywhere, all the time. Goodbye and good luck.

Diagnosing Silly Bullshit | Austin Baraki

[Sean Herbison]

Next up are pin lifts, both pin bench press and pin squats. I fail to see the ROI on these when compared against their inherent risk.

I'm still curious about what the inherent risk is supposed to be. Am I missing something that makes pin work dangerous?

[perman]

I think if pressed, Mike would say that "targeting weaknesses" is theoretical and that the skill transfer of assistance lifts to the competition lift is high when the variations are similar.

Perhaps, though I still see him care about where the sticking point is in coaching calls, and then prescribing pin work at that height for assistance work. I don't see why you would do that if you didn't believe the conventional powerlifting wisdom of prescribing assistance work for weak ROM. I suppose the mechanism of why that would work may be semantics, but you both seem to believe it works I guess...

[kidcolin]

Personally, I like paused DLs. Well, okay, I hate them, but I find them effective for focusing on keeping the back from rounding at the initiation of the pull.


What are the inherent risks you're referring to? Pin squats seem to piss of my left arm, but that's the only issue I've had with them, and that doesn't seem to be an issue with other people who've done them. I've never had any issues with pin bench. So I'm curious.

I also kind of "like" paused DLs, which I'll elaborate on at the end of this post.

As for pin work, I should note I went back and read the lift details in the bridge and they're basically advocating setting the pin height such that it's a paused lift but with the safeties acting as deloads. I'm more familiar with pin pressing through a limited ROM, and if you talk to anyone who has done a fair bit of pin pressing, they complain about feeling beat up in the shoulders and elbows after a few weeks. I always attributed it to the act of deloading the weight, getting a little relaxed, and then jamming into a static weight on the concentric. So maybe that's less of a factor with the setup they endorse. However, if you stay fully engaged with the weight, I'd counter, why not just do a paused lift and get that tiny bit of extra ROM and do away with any concern with getting slack under a deloaded weight?

As for the pin squat, I just very much dislike the idea of anything touching a heavy load on my back during my execution of the lift. The bar position might shift; I might be tempted to relax my low back slightly with the lessened load. I just see very little marginal ROI in such a lift.

Also, I'm not sold on the competition-style lifts for a hobby lifter who has no intention of competing. I like handling heavier weights, and tough-and-go bench press for example is much more rewarding to me than doing multiple sets/reps of paused bench.

While I agree that strength training != powerlifting competition, paused variants, especially for the bench and squat, are among my favorite because they drill proper positioning. I've seen plenty of examples of people getting a bit sloppy to go after extra rebound to hit a PR. This is especially true when AMRAP is employed (I def have been guilty of this when going for big squat AMRAP sets). So while I wouldn't ditch touch and go benching, having comp bench or a paused bench variant programmed in as well will probably help in the long run. However, if you don't get sloppy and your form is rock solid I'd agree, no real need for the comp bench.

I think that at least the squat variations are there to lower the possible intensity. You simply cannot pause or tempo squat as much as a belted squat.

Maybe I'm reading into things, but I see The Bridge as a way to learn to use RPE and lift choices like this help to do that regardless if they are the best choices once someone has working with RPE down.

Both Austin and Jordan have cited this exact reason for their inclusion. I took it to mean that a set of paused squats @8 has a greater training effect than a set of regular squats @6, even if the weight on the bar is the same.

Right, I get that, but what's wrong with another round of squats @8? Recovery will be the answer, but that's hard to say confidently. In something like a 3-0-3 tempo squat, your time under tension is pretty high despite the lesser load, and I'd also argue you're getting less benefit from the hip drive so you're fatiguing other muscles anyway. Also, why not just squat the lesser load for more reps to get a similar RPE? This is basically what I do, especially for squats. Another alternative is just increasing density with shorter rest periods. Your @6 squats aren't @6 anymore when you do 5x5 in 15 minutes.

I've been doing paused squat & deadlift on Medium days of my HLM routine, and notice that they allow me to train fairly hard (subjectively) with relatively light weights.

The fatigue is different -- I recover faster than I would from that level of effort using normal technique & heavier weight.
This allows me to be recovered in time for the subsequent Heavy day.

Probably I could do the same thing with more sets at the same weight, unpaused. But it would take longer.

This is all anecdotal, though. You don't totally know that, and you might not think so if you hadn't been told "full lifts = more fatigue". Much like pain, there's a psychological component to recovery. e.g., every SS disciple who thinks deadlifts uniquely "fry your CNS" and low back.


So, to summarize, I'm not against all variants nor am I against programming in any lift variations. I do like the introduction of RPE and I do see an argument for trying quite a few variants to dial that in, but I don't agree with it. RPE is tricky as is, it's certainly tricky for trainers with under 1 year of lifting under their belt, and adding in multiple variables that rotate week to week isn't the best way to dial that in.

In terms of the variants, I would generally ditch pin lifts, especially in near-novice populations. I'd lean towards paused variants as I think they do the best to drill good form and proper positioning. Once I pick one, I'm probably using it for at least 8 weeks. Just because I feel like posting them, my general go-to variants are:

For bench and press: paused bench, DB bench, DB incline, CGBP
For squat: paused squat, front squat, high bar, safety bar squat if you have access to one
For DL: RDLs, paused, straight leg. I hardly fuck with rack pulls but I probably should. I actually find RDLs the best but also the most brutal.