starting strength gym
Page 43 of 46 FirstFirst ... 334142434445 ... LastLast
Results 421 to 430 of 456

Thread: The Bridge

  1. #421
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    84

    Default

    • starting strength seminar april 2024
    • starting strength seminar jume 2024
    • starting strength seminar august 2024
    One other note on the pin lifts I forgot to mention: many of us lift in commercial gyms and you don't always have access to the power rack, so you squat and bench in the squat rack and standard bench. Or if you do have access to one, you don't always get the same one and pin heights vary.

    Just a very unnecessary training variable with little if any ROI over standard paused work.

  2. #422
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    10,199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kidcolin View Post
    One other note on the pin lifts I forgot to mention: many of us lift in commercial gyms and you don't always have access to the power rack, so you squat and bench in the squat rack and standard bench. Or if you do have access to one, you don't always get the same one and pin heights vary.

    Just a very unnecessary training variable with little if any ROI over standard paused work.
    I disagree. There are unique aspects to both paused and pin work. I think both can be useful in a non novice lifter.

    The fatigue is markedly different for a given volume of variants vs "comp" lifts. I hope you don't think they're the same, as you alluded to above.

  3. #423
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    10,199

    Default

    Alright, big response inline:

    Quote Originally Posted by kidcolin View Post
    Kinda skimmed the thread so apologies if this has been discussed. To preface, I have the utmost respect for Jordan and Austin, as well as for Mike Tuchscherer*.
    Which brings me to the exercise selection. I am not against all lift variations, but I am skeptical that this many variants is optimal for late-stage novices/early-stage intermediates, who almost certainly have form gaps in the main lifts
    I disagree with this considering the volume of the main lifts that is still included and the fact that nearly all variants are fairly close to the competition lifts. Many sources who are referred to when considering programming, e.g. Bondarchuk, would suggest that transfer of these exercises is very good- not "FPS"

    It reeks of FPS. Let's take Paused DLs, for example (a lift I've used in programming in the past, I might add).. are they any more effective than regular deadlifts done at lower intensity?
    "More effective" for what? For strength as tested by the competition deadlift? I think in the short term (<3 weeks -an arbitrary number here)- probably not. But given this is a non-specific developmental training program that would likely produce a good response with a mini taper involving much fewer variations then I think the answer is different. In other words, yes- it likely produces improved strength demonstration than just regular deadlifts over the long term. Why? Better fatigue management that is fuzzier with regular, lighter deadlifts. Improved focus on force curve work and technique improvement.

    Perhaps they train proper lat engagement, I don't know. They do increase fatigue at a lower intensity, which is perhaps beneficial (not sure). They're harder to track in terms of RPE, though, (a 2ct paused DL almost always becomes a 1ct paused DL at heavy weights.. I've even seen it in Austin's and Jordan's vids).
    I do not think they're harder to track with RPE, but not having someone count your pause certainly gives more leeway. Using a metronome or counter can help during longer development plans. Still, that doesn't mean that rpe is harder to track.

    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. What do pin squats get you that pause squats don't? Same for bench.
    What are the added risks? As far as your question, you get an absolute elimination of the stretch reflex, a focus on the concentric portion of the force curve and this can be beneficial when working towards a taper or inclusion of more specific variants.

    In general, it'd be nice to see justification and purpose for each lift. When formulating such justifications, you may find it separates the wheat from the chaff when it comes to lift variants.
    We ran out of time during the writing of this free eBook and template, but thought to include what we felt was best. Sorry.

    Quote Originally Posted by Euby View Post
    Well said, and while I didn't think of it in this kid of detail, for me this describes how I felt yesterday, when suddenly at week 5 I'm giving up close grip bench in favor of 3-count paused bench, and rack pulls for 2-count paused deadlift. I suspect that it's just to get familiarity with new lift variations which might be beneficial down the road, so okay I suppose.
    Not necessarily. We are trying to optimize transfer to the tested lifts (insofar as they are tested). Driving the same assistance lifts ad infinitum tends to be of low return, we've found.

    I also get that some folks aren't able to do light/medium lifts due to feeling like they aren't working hard, but for me I like light/medium squats/deads. It's a nice mental break. I found myself wondering yesterday if I wouldn't do better with just doing all the major lifts on all 3 weekly sessions, but doing the light/medium versions at a 5%/10% reduction respectively just to keep things simple.
    Depends on the total fatigue, which I'd argue is much harder to control for when weights are very light.

    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.
    What is strange is that most folks who train both lifts, e.g. the pause and the TnG bench tend to have similar numbers on both- likely due to both the training of the paused bench and the lack of a bounce on the TnG bench.

    Quote Originally Posted by Euby View Post
    Yes, the authors have specifically stated this. Personally, I'd just rather do the same exact lift at a percentage decrease on the light/medium days. If there's is an adaptation that is gained from these variations, I'd like to know what they are.
    It's going to be specific for each context. It would take pages to explain each one.

    Actually, on a Barbell Medicine podcast I just listed to last night, both Jordan and Austin stated that there is no additional benefit to doing lift variations as opposed to just doing the actual lift.
    In the context of a short peak - correct. For longer development, we would suggest assistance lifts have benefits.


    Quote Originally Posted by Euby View Post
    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.
    Well, if the RPE isn't correct- yes I would agree.

    Quote Originally Posted by perman View Post
    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...
    I believe the force curves are fairly predictable (within a range), which is why you see similar assistance work across lifters.

    Quote Originally Posted by kidcolin View Post
    I
    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.
    There is no deload with the pin variations, rather- this is controlling the ROM while eliminating the stretch reflex.

    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?
    Because you'll always cheat the paused lift, e.g. a little bounce on the squat, heave and drive on the bench, down and up on the DL (or shortened pause). It lessens the focus on the concentric.

    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.
    This legitimately never happens in my experience and given the incredibly low rate of injury in competitive lifting, I think this is a weak argument for elimination of any exercise in general. Specific instances may be different overall.

    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.
    The fatigue is different (bc time under tension doesn't really contribute). The weight is lighter, the volume is less, and using the effort level intraset allows us to control for fatigue nearly absolutely.

    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.
    That would produce too much fatigue if it replaced tempo squats in The Bridge, though in the context of another program that might be fine. It's transfer to long term development is likely not as good as a tempo squat either, but during a taper....just some lighter squats would probably be advised with specific control parameters.

  4. #424
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    10,199

    Default

    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.
    Everything in this thread is anecdotal except for volume, though our results are empirical and ultimately why we programmed it how we did.

    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.
    What do you base this on? Our experiences have been very different (and less arbitrary). Some lifters can pick up RPE with <1 year of lifting and good correspondence/instruction. Some lifters with years of experience cannot. Some will progress in spite of this and others won't despite it. There is no one size fits all, but we've had some good success by using RPE's corresponding with percentages and long term development of lifters using variants.

    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:
    I would absolutely not use the same variant for 8 weeks. Lots of evidence professionally that lifters get stale on that and see decreased performance with that unless other variables significantly change (volume and intensity), though some evidence that those lifters either have other things going on, eg. drugs/weight gain/still novices. Just a professional disagreement between us here. On the one hand, I can't tell you your experience is invalid, but I can tell you I have the data and logs of hundreds of thousands of client-training hours and that does not comport with your suggestions here. When combined with Mike T's, this data becomes stronger.

  5. #425
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    6,509

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jordan Feigenbaum View Post
    What is strange is that most folks who train both lifts, e.g. the pause and the TnG bench tend to have similar numbers on both- likely due to both the training of the paused bench and the lack of a bounce on the TnG bench.
    I've noticed that as well, and they're more and more similar as time goes by. Before I competed, I could not do nearly as much with a pause, but now I can do almost exactly the same with or without. This is a little less true with higher reps, but for singles they're probably within 5 lbs of each other.

  6. #426
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Southeast
    Posts
    190

    Default

    Interesting stuff, and many thanks to Jordan for taking the time to respond. Whatever is going on with the programming in the Bridge, I can feel progress is being made and I'm learning at the same time.

  7. #427
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Winter Haven, FL
    Posts
    14

    Default

    I'm in week 7 and I haven't had this much fun since the 1st few months of LP. RPE is pretty straight forward and if you read "General Strength Training Template for the Intermediate/Advanced" by Jordan and use a RPE calculator it becomes very clear. The RPE calculator keeps you honest because after all 80% feels really heavy and you may stop yourself there but you could do 86% like prescribed. I love the accessory lifts and must say the pin and pause stuff gives you a lot of feedback on your form. I have managed to must some PR's in my training log due to the 1 rep @ RPE8's. What's that you say I shouldn't be getting a PR at an 8? Well I guess the scale is moving due to all of the new volume i'm getting in.

    Jordan thanks for this program and what would you recommend after?

  8. #428
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    3,660

    Default

    That's great to hear, and you most certainly can get PRs at RPE 8. Glad to see you did that.

  9. #429
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Baton Rouge, LA
    Posts
    183

    Default

    Great responses Jordan. I look forward to running this program very soon and it's cool to see the thought process & research behind the lift selections. I will do my best to follow the program to a "T", as you dudes seem to be pretty smart.

    Nice job SHOLCOMB72!

  10. #430
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    35

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Some positive experiences with the Bridge.

    Anybody running it and having problems ?

Page 43 of 46 FirstFirst ... 334142434445 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •