[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/fit/ - Fitness


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



SS is a fucking scam. If you ain't planning powerlifting it's garbage.
Following link proves it, can't understand why SS is recommend in sticky anyway.

http://nattyornot.com/how-to-make-the-program-starting-strength-work-for-aesthetics-dont-get-fat/
>>
BASED
>>
>>51153942
That blog post is retarded holy shit
>>
>>51153942
>nattyornot
>>
>>51153942
The dyel mods haven’t updated the sticky in like 5+ years.
>>
I'm on week 1 of SS. Should I be doing something else then?
>>
>>51153942
>>51154064
>>51154128
>>51154150
>>51154154
>>51154195
Reasons SS/SL should be removed from the sticky:

>It has too little upper body volume.
Over 2 weeks, you hit your chest and deltoids 3 times each and your biceps 0 times (biceps are a secondary muscle in rows).

>It has too little deadlift volume.
It is perfectly ideal to deadlift more than 1x per week, or at the least to deadlift far more than just 1 set in a session.

>It has no hypertrophy and accessory work.
Most people in gainit probably want to focus on more visual changes. Stronglifts is the antithesis of a program that will provide aesthetic and visual improvement.

>It does not promote or encourage proper progression.
GSLP, an SL variation (that includes arm work), includes the final set to be until failure. These sets help you to be aware of your progress in relation to increasing the next increment in progression, and help you to determine the speed and timing of your next increase.

>It does not include arm work because "if you only do heavy compound exercises like Squats and Deadlifts, without direct arm work, then your arms will increase in size"
It's simply moronic to discourage targeting the arms and recommending squats/deadlifts to build arms instead.

>People stay on SL5x5 for too long
People often use SL5x5 and plateau because eventually they outgrow the program and can't gain much more. This issue a byproduct of lack of volume/frequency.
>>
>>51154237
>No variation in rep/set ranges
SL sacrifices variation in weight, reps, sets, and intensity in the name of simplicity. Even an exercise (rows) that may arguably be more beneficial in hypertrophy ranges is at 5 reps. The 5x5 scheme doesn't account for beginners being unable to hit 5x5 on a harder exercise (OHP).

>It promotes plateaus
SL5x5 strongly encourages people to deload by great amounts. Deloading by far more than is necessary. It suggests that beginners start at the bar and only increase by x amount per week, get to a point until they stall, then to deload and start all over again. This almost reads like someone made a program to try and sabotage people's training.


These flaws have caused people to become confused about training, with many often afraid to do more than 1 set of deadlifts, or train the same muscle two days in a row, or doing AMRAP sets, or add their own extra exercises because SL discourages beginners to go off the program with scare tactics. The flaws of SL5x5 greatly outweigh its benefits. Additionally, any benefits that Stronglifts has is likely shared by other programs too.

Please petition by replying below. Thanks.
>>
>>51154237
>too little upper body volume
This desu, I've had DOMS in my legs all week but fuck all in my upper body apart from my arms. So should I switch to a different beginner program?
T. >>51154195
>>
>>51153942
>How to get a strength program to work for aesthetics
I don't even need to read to know it's retarded
>>
>>51154279

What are your goals?

I've settled on a classic 5 day split after 4 years of lifting. I find strength is continuing to climb steadily as well as lean mass.
>>
Also, download a torrent of the encyclopedia of muscle & strength, 2 edition by jim stoppani.

The programmes are basic enough but the explanation behind each is very good.
>>
>>51154420
I feel my goals are a bit jumbled in my head. I want to build some muscle and gain strength because currently I'm so scrawny it's embarassing, but I'm also slightly overweight. I want to lose fat and gain muscle but the amount of contradicting advice and information is confusing me.
>>
File: IMG_6456.png (240 KB, 400x400)
240 KB
240 KB PNG
>>51153942
Everyone shitting on SS is a fag who hasn't even read the book. It's a great foundation for strength. If you just want to look decent and have okay strength you can do whatever you want and it will work, but SS helps develop your strength and technique for the future
>>
>>51153942
Jesus Christ, has anyone ever told you what a goddamn mistake you are? The only reason you’d say that is if you’re a bitch-ass skinny twink piece of shit yourself lmao fucking faggot. 9.9 times out of 10, size is absolutely indicator of success. I can’t even fucking imagine what it’s like to be so up your own ass you’d say that. Sure, there are definitely people who look like concentration camp prisoners and can still lift alright but they’re few and far between. The vast majority of normal, healthy people will get noticeably bigger as they continue to lift. God this is the worst fuckin cope I’ve seen on this board, I’d say hang yourself but you’re probably so fucking small you’d slip through the rope.
>>
the blog post seems sensible enough, but it just seems the same as ss anyway. The fact he picks high bar over low bar makes sense to me, alan thrall recommends the same thing for most people who aren't power lifters too. So low bar enables you to lift more by closely mimicking the same movement of a deadlift, while high bar is more functional and is the "purest form" of a squat. There's no point in doing two deadlifts (low bar/deadlifting) when you can do two different movements for more benefits (highbar/deadlift)

The only hangup I have is what programme to follow if you're an athlete and play rugby? With functional strength being priority and aesthetics being secondary.
>>
>>51154502
>low bar vs high bar
Stop parroting misinformation. There's no difference between the two.
>>
>>51154472

Don't over-complicate it.

For you i would recommend a basic 3 day split;

Commonly a Monday, Wednesday and Friday but it can by any really.

For example;

Monday - Chest, delts & abs

Wednesday - Legs

Friday - Back, arms & abs

As basic of a routine as you get really. That plus a decent diet will certainly give you a good start. You could also add in a day of going swimming after work, usually i go on a saturday as i train legs on a friday and it helps with any doms, plus is great low impact cardio.
>>
>>51154237
>Over 2 weeks, you hit your chest and deltoids 3 times each and your biceps 0 times
You're supposed to add pullups, retard. Read the book. Rip even says he adds in curls if he has the energy.
>>
>>51153942
>http://nattyornot.com/how-to-make-the-program-starting-strength-work-for-aesthetics-dont-get-fat/

this is actually a pretty insightful read, thanks op
>>
File: 1535270002315.png (546 KB, 960x536)
546 KB
546 KB PNG
>Nattyornot is making a comeback

What a time to be alive. This is the guy behind it, by the way.

http://genovapedia.org/blahapedia.html
>>
>>51154526
Thanks, I'll try to rework my routine a bit. I also do cardio on some off days if I'm not too sore, swimming would be fun but it's a bit of a hassle to drive to my local pool.
>>
>>51154472
It literally can't be simpler than this. Pick a program that focuses on compound movements (like SS), hit the gym at least 3 times per week for half a year and keep an eye on your food. Make sure you keep a progressive overload because gaining strength while on a caloric surplus should result in muscle gains as well.
If someone is trying to tell you otherwise they are straight up lying. After half a year, when you have presumably mastered the compounds to a degree and made some gains, you can worry about switching up your program/cutting etc.
>>
>>51154595
Don't listen to him he's just another SS troll. You need to be hitting the gym at least 5 times a week to make any real mass gains. His retarded 3/w split has even LESS volume than SS. LOL!

Here's a basic beginner aesthetics routine. If you have the energy you should be doing more though. Maybe even go twice a day with a second session for arms on the days you're not training them. Do a bit of cardio on arm day to burn fat as well.

Monday: Chest
>Bench
>Floor press
>Board press
>Cable flys
>Rotator cuff warm up
>Incline bench
>Incline dumbell flys
>Push-ups

Tuesday: Back
>Yates rows
>Weighted back extensions
>Pull ups
>Lat pulldown
>Rear delt flys

Wednesday: Legs
>Leg press
>RDL
>Calf raises
>Abs
>Jog for 30 minutes

Thursday: Shoulders
>Seated dumbell OHP
>Seated barbell OHP (to parallel; going lower will injure you same with bench)
>Cable raises
>Lateral raises
>Front raises
>Rear delt flys

Friday: ARMS
>Barbell curls
>Skulcrushers
>Dumbell curls
>Cable pushdowns
>Hammer curls
>Dumbell skullcrushers
>Cable curls
>Tricep dips
>Forearms
>Forearms the other way
>>
>>51154640
Saturday: Bullet
>>
>>51154640
Real question: I understand the idea that with a brosplit you absolutely decimate the muscle group in a single training session but ultimately you only have a 48h window of elevated protein synthesis. Why would you not opt for a program that allows you to hit a muscle group twice per week? Not denying that you can make gains with a brosplit but still.

Also
>Calf raises
Jesus Christ lad
>>
>>51154237
>Starting
>Volume
>>
>>51154475
fucking lol you're mad. have sex
>>
File: namazu.png (156 KB, 497x337)
156 KB
156 KB PNG
>>51153942
>strength training
>upset it doesn't make you aesthetic, something it never claimed, nor was supposed to do
Are you also upset when a mechanic doesn't paint hot rod flames on your car?
>>
lmao what a sad incel blogpost. best the story he told in the beginning was his real life.
I'm not saying this to defend SS in anyway, but you can just tell he's lying out of his butt in the text with passages like "squatting low bar destroys your wrists" lmao you, you're not trying to hold on to the bar are you? and you're trying to give others advice? lolololol
>>
>>51154523
I know you won't watch this or listen to me but heres a link for anybody reading your comment and thinking it's okay to revel in bullshit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQuCi2h_kNI

main points covered:
>high bar generally develops quads better
>low bar generally develops posterior chain better
>high bar is a harder movement to learn and requires more ankle flexibility
>low bar is easier to learn as it requires not so much ankle flexibility
>low bar is similar to a deadlift as it recruits the lower back and posterior chain a lot
>high bar recruits less muscles but recruits the quads a lot more

There's obviously a difference between the two, personally I'd say high bar is better judging from the information, because it's more """functional""" for the general person/athlete whereas lowbar is great if you're concerned about how high your numbers are. But lowbar doesn't make you stronger because you're hitting higher numbers it just means you're doing a completely different movement and recruiting more/different muscles.

There's no point in doing low bar if you're doing deadlifts as they're basically the same thing. You're better off doing highbar and deadlifts and saving your CNS a bit and actually having a more well rounded program... unless you're really obsessed with having an imbalance with your posterior chain and front leg muscles.
>>
>>51154195
You can do it for 3months but then change routine, i did for a long time and i bulked to hard. It has not been a pleasant experience. Stick with it and get your lifts up but then change routine. If you want to change then i recommend you do the barbell medicine beginner routine.
>>
>>51154866
How the hell did I know you were going to link alan thrall. I almost expected art of manliness. Stop parroting subjects you don't know about.
>>
>>51153942
SS is fine. If you don't like the upper/lower body imbalance just do Greyskull LP instead. Doesn't matter because you're just going to do it for a couple of months to learn the lifts. Most people, myself included, just fuck up the program by adding exercises (mostly for aesthetics) anyway.
>>
>>51154866
Do you have any actual opinions of your own or do you just copy youtube personalities?
>>
StrongLifts and Starting Strength might be the most often-recommended programs on this board, and they’re pretty good at introducing new lifters to the gym. However, if you plan on using them to gain strength or muscle mass, they’re poor options.

Many of you might say you’ve ran SL and SS and got fine results, but that’s not really what makes a good program for a new lifter. New lifters can see results from doing damn near anything. A good beginner program gets you results efficiently. So, here’s why I believe the base SL and SS programs are suboptimal, and how you should tweak them. To keep things simple, I’ll be focusing my critiques on SL, but the majority carries over to SS as well.
>>
>>51154963
1: Lack of frequency

This one is especially funny since SL is often referred to as a high-frequency program. I disagree with that label. Over a two-week period, you hit your pecs, biceps, and shoulders (the muscles most guys care about for aesthetics) only three times. Elevated muscle protein synthesis, the driver of hypertrophy (1), lasts roughly 36 hours after training (2). Since you should keep protein synthesis elevated as much as possible, averaging 112 hours between muscle stimuli as SL does is far from optimal. Even while controlling for volume and intensity, high frequency generally beats out low frequency for both muscle and strength development (3).

Fix: Bench and Overhead Press every workout.
>>
I did the SS Stripped 5X5 for 2 1/2 months and had decent results.
Plan to stay on it for a few more weeks and then change my routine.
>>
>>51154866
Okay now forget all of that bullshit and listen to this. The only difference between the two lifts is lowbar has the bar 2" further down your back, which artificially shortens your torso, making the lever arm smaller, so the force experience by your joints is less despite the weight being the same.
>>
>>51154128
What gave it away, the retarded URL?
>>
>>51155016
>>51155032
>>51155034
>>51155042
2: Lack of volume

Increase in muscle mass trends logarithmically over time, meaning beginner lifters can gain the most muscle in the least amount of time. This is important even if you’re only interested in strength, because increasing your muscle mass is the best way to increase your strength (4). Researchers recommend a minimum of ten weekly sets for each muscle to see good results (8)- SL gives you 7.5 for pecs, shoulders, and biceps, and 1.5 for hamstrings. This means increasing sets (5) and reps per set (6) are the best ways to maximize both aesthetic and strength progress.

Fix: Do more sets and more reps when possible.
>>
>>51155069
>>51155016
>>51154963
Shut the fuck up DYEL
>>
>>51155069
>>51155085
3: Lack of bicep involvement

Rows and cleans alone aren’t great at growing biceps. Your biceps are only secondary muscles involved in the movements, meaning they won’t really be taken anywhere close to failure. Since number of sets near muscular failure is the primary factor when inspiring protein synthesis (6), your bicep development will be subpar if you don’t fix this.

Fix: Ideally, add Chin-Ups. Not only do they hit the biceps hard, but the extra back work will balance out your increased benching. If you can’t do Chin-Ups, do 30° Bent-Over Rows with supinated grip, which shifts emphasis to the biceps
>>
>>51155098
Clearly you've never read SS
>>
>>51153942
>add chin ups
>add
I know for a fact this retard never read the book, but chin ups *are* in the fucking program already
>>
>>51155098
>>51155116
4: Poopie diapey lower body programming

If you’re mainly interested in aesthetics, SL is probably a bit squat-heavy for you. If you’re mainly interested in strength, 1x5 deadlifts three times every two weeks is a bad plan. Taking the time to warm up and load the bar, only to perform one serious set is not an efficient way to spend your time. The idea that you should only do 1 set because CNS fatigue is silly. SL is made for beginners using light weight. CNS fatigue is not an issue for them. The idea that you should only do 1 set to avoid form breakdown is flawed as well. The programs are designed to eventually push you to form breakdown regardless of how many sets you’ve performed, so that’s inevitable. On top of all of this, Deadlifts are really the only exercise in the program that hit your hamstrings (no, Squats don’t to a significant degree [9])- why give them a measly 3 total sets every two weeks?

Fix: Squat less, Deadlift more. The increased leg work from Deadlifts will make up for decreasing Squats.
>>
>>51155032
>I did the SS Stripped 5X5
You did not do SS. SS has 3x5 and 1x5 on the deadlift and 5 sets of 3 on the power clean.
>>
>>51155116
No one complaining about SS ever read the book. Hell, they haven't even read the SL website since they don't know about the added accessories there either.
The bottom line is that both programs are good for building strength, and will become really good for aesthetics as well once you have some gym experience under your belt and begin to add exercises as you like too
>>
The low bar squat is not a squat. It’s a squat-morning (a combination of a barbell squat and a barbell good morning).

fucking BASED
>>
>>51155167
>don't understand program
>don't follow program
>complain program bad
like pottery
>>
Can we just admit the GSLP is the best beginner routine and add that to the sticky instead
>>
>>51154948
>every opinion and thought is organic and has never been influenced by anything else in the world
Get the fuck over yourself, mate. It doesn't matter where you extract an opinion from, if it makes sense then that's all that matters.. either way I'm not just flat copying what he says I'm actually taking it into consideration and thinking about it. Now you on the other hand:

>me no like utube he wrong!!!1!one!

>>51155034
Yeah, I mean in the grand scheme of things I guess there's no harm in doing lowbar as opposed to high bar, both lifts will get you incredibly strong, im not denying that. I'm also not saying that lowbar is wrong, I'm just saying that if we're being nitpicky here then we can agree that low bar recruits mainly your posterior chain whereas highbar recruits your quads a lot more. This means that for athletes and general people it's a better excercise.. you can't just dismiss everything I've said and say "oh but its only a 2inch difference" yeah well you're acting as though 2inches isn't a difference where if you had the bar 2inches lower than a lowbar you'd break your fucking back. If you had the bar 2 inches higher than a highbar you'd break your neck, 2 inches is a big difference.

>the force experienced by the joints is less despite being the same weight

Yeah but you're recruiting more muscles therefore you can lift more with lowbar than you can highbar, we've already established that but the argument is that the lowbar closely mimicks a deadlift and if you told me "a deadlift recruits more muscles than a highbar squat therefore you lift the same with less stress on the joints." of course you do because they're different lifts. There's nothing wrong with lowbar but if you're doing 2 movements that are closely related (lowbar/deadlifts) wouldn't it make sense to swap the lowbar for a highbar since it'd give you a more well rounded program?
>>
>>51155191
What did you expect outta nu-/fit/. They read "squat 5x5" and their basedfull brain enters meltdown mode
"No curls? No hypertrophy? This program is a joke" This board became what it used to make fun of in better times
>>
File: 1.png (88 KB, 512x512)
88 KB
88 KB PNG
>>51153942
>nattyornot

I'm not going to listen to a fucking dyel that never posts body, doesn't squat, and doesn't deadlift.

SAGE GOES IN ALL FIELDS
>>
>>51155206
No. Encouraging complete noobs to go to failure is just going to result in bad form and injuries. Add curls and lateral raises to SS and take those to failure if you want.
The sticky is garbage. It could just be replaced with:
>IF FAT: DO SS
>IF SKINNY: DO SS+GOMAD
>>
>>51155254
looks like you havent even read the sticky
>>
File: 1557577155459.png (302 KB, 819x827)
302 KB
302 KB PNG
>>51154866
If you're into athletics I almost think you WOULD WANT to work on your posture chain because of a less susceptible to injury and also getting good jammies and glutes are good for sticking it in for the misses/misters
>>
>>51153942
PHAT is superior
>>
>>51154640
Look at this faggot.
>>
>>51154640
hahahahahahaah okay bud. good luck with your lifting
>>
>>51155222
>you're recruiting more muscles
You literally are not. You are recruiting the exact same muscles, the exact same amount. Your torso is a lever and your hips are a fulcrum. Takes a physics class.
>>
>>51155287
Hammies*
>>
File: IMG_20190611_202729.png (83 KB, 1500x500)
83 KB
83 KB PNG
>>51153942

FYI most people who slam SS and do great on other more "aesthetic" programs are on drugs.

SS and Rippetoe/Baker programming in general is very good for natural lifters with average genetics. They have all sorts of variations for programming to achieve different goals. Sure you probably won't look like some bodybuilder with 8% bodyfat but you're never going to look that way being natural with average genetics anyway.
>>
>>51154640
>not exercising groups at least twice a week for hypertrophy
>>
>>51154963
Jesus Christ stop copypasting the same shit over and over
>>
File: 1547607622898.jpg (35 KB, 550x422)
35 KB
35 KB JPG
>>51153942
Funny how this bitter faggot makes all these long winded articles of bullshit spewing but he has never and will never post body.
>>
>>51154279
rip has specifically said a trillion times: if you want to do extra curl and tricep work, go for it, just do it at the end of your workout. Jeff Cavaliere (athleanx on youtube) has very decent bicep and brachialis advice. For tris look at rip's video on the lying triceps extension.
>>
>>51154237
>It has too little upper body volume.
A decent critique. Over the first two years of a lifter however, I'd rather they get a respectable bench and press, then add volume later. Pushing intensity early (ie, weight on the bar) helps them far more than adding sets or sessions. 25 total reps at 135 isn't going to do shit for hypertrophy.

>It has too little deadlift volume.
Hasn't read the book, isn't doing the program. You deadlift every session until you can't handle the volume, then move to 1x a week.

>It has no hypertrophy and accessory work.
"Hypertrophy work" is useless for beginners who need to use pink dumbells to get eight to twelve reps. See above.

>It does not promote or encourage proper progression.
This doesn't mean anything. SS is one of the only programs designed with progression in mind. Your point about taking beginners to failure is equally retarded.

>It does not include arm work because "if you only do heavy compound exercises like Squats and Deadlifts, without direct arm work, then your arms will increase in size"
Why waste time, energy, and resources on exercises that give you little bang for your buck, when you can be getting stronger? Again, 185 press > 40 lbs tricep pushdowns to failure.
>People stay on SL5x5 for too long
Resets and progression to an intermediate program are part of SS. Didn't read the book.
>>
>>51155150
5: No periodization

This one’s simple: Not varying your rep ranges is sub-optimal for both strength and hypertrophy progress (10). SL sacrifices this great strategy in the name of simplicity. I think you can handle a little variation. You’re not stupid.

Fix: Vary your rep ranges.
>>
>>51154253
>No variation in rep/set ranges
Didn't read the book. Changes to 5x3 etc, are all outlined in SS.

>It promotes plateaus
I'd rather get a novice to a 300 lbs squat plateau in 3 months than fuck around for a year with no gains in strength or hypertrophy.

>These flaws have caused people to become confused about training, with many often afraid to do more than 1 set of deadlifts, or train the same muscle two days in a row, or doing AMRAP sets, or add their own extra exercises.

Then they, like you, are too retarded to read the fucking book.
>>
>>51155493
post body before continuing, DYELbro
>>
>>51155222
Not him but Alan Thrall is laughable. Stop parroting him and read a book.
>>
>>51155326
well technically you use the same muscles but the posterior chain is MORE STRESSED during a low bar than in a high bar, where the quads are MORE STRESSED in high bar than in low bar. So you can be a nitpicky asshole all day, but at the end of the day they don't do the exact same thing.
>>
>>51155493
6: Boring start

If you’re healthy and just getting into lifting, it can take you a considerable amount of time to get to challenging weights following the typical SL progression scheme. Going so long without being challenged will have new lifters quitting before they even start touching real weights.

Fix: Use infrequent AMRAP (as many reps as possible) sets to determine progression speed.
>>
Starting Strength is a great strength program for beginners.

The guy in the blog post is a muppet and doesn't realise that low bar squatting gets your quads XBOXHUEG by virtue of lifting much heavier weight than a freestyle/highbar squat.
>>
Put simply: Because they aren’t good.

Obviously that’s not a sufficient answer, so let’s talk specifics.

The total volume is bad and so is how it’s distributed
Volume is important for muscle growth, especially long term.

SS is much more guilty of this than SL, but they’re both pretty low volume overall. In addition, the volume is disproportionately distributed towards your lower body. Have you heard the term “T-Rex Mode”? It’s what you’ll get – Big lower body, small upper body. There is too much squatting and not enough everything else.

We’ll start with the upper body volume problems. As an example, in both routines, the only exercise that works your chest directly is the Bench Press. Let’s quantify how much work your chest is getting in terms we can all understand, like total sets over the course of two weeks.

Sunday – Nothing
Monday – 3/5 sets of Bench Press
Tuesday – Nothing
Wednesday – Nothing
Thursday – Nothing
Friday – 3/5 sets of Bench Press
Saturday – Nothing
Sunday – Nothing
Monday – Nothing
Tuesday – Nothing
Wednesday – 3/5 sets of Bench Press
Thursday – Nothing
Friday – Nothing
Saturday – Nothing
>>
>>51155098
>add chin-ups
Not sure if you're accusing SS of not doing them, or this one was only on SL, but SS highly advocates chinups
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtRHAE7bqR8
>>
>>51155521
The quads are not going to be more stressed during any kind of squat than any other because they extend the knee and no matter what, under a heavy load, are going to be working as hard as they can. The only difference is what spinal erectors are most relied on, for front squats it's thoracic, for lowbar it's lumbar, and for highbar it's a bit more even.
>>
>>51155526
bro stop you're making it m0re and more clear you have not read the book with every post
>>
>>51155538
>>51155563
>>51155576
>>51155570
In total, only 9-15 sets of a chest exercise over two weeks. To put this in perspective, compare that to:

An often recommended beginners’ PPL program, which has 6-8 chest sets (Bench/DB Incline Bench) in a single workout and 16 per week. This is 3x the chest volume of SS and 2x that of SL in the same time period.
5/3/1 for Beginners, which has 8 bench press sets in a single workout and 16 per week. On top of that, depending on your choice of Push accessory work, you can have 10-30 sets of other chest exercises in a week for a total of 26-56. This is on average 4.5x the volume SS provides and 2.7x the volume SL provides in the same time period.
Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Split from Encyclopedia of Modern Bodybuilding, which has 6-8 chest sets (Bench/Incline Bench) in a single workout and 18-24 sets in the course of a week. This is on average 4.6x the chest volume of SS and 2.8x the chest volume of SL in the same time period.
Are you noticing a pattern? You can repeat this not just with many other routines, but with many other muscles in the upper body as well. Triceps are slightly better because they’re hit by both Bench and OHP, but still low compared to many other routines. The comparison gets even more dismal when you look at volume for biceps (no direct work), back (only rows, only in SL), shoulders (only OHP), and everyone’s favorite – abs (no direct work). And contrary to what the creators of these routines will tell you, the idea that you can stimulate adequate strength and growth in your abs (or core in general) just from doing squats and a single set of deadlifts, or in your arms from minimal sets of rows, bench, and OHP, is so absurd it defies description. This goes likewise with your back – SS itself has no significant back work until you get to “Phase 3” and add chinups, which could be months.
>>
>>51155563
SL actually had chinups and dips in the main program for years. They only got dumped to the "add later" portion because newfags would only care about dips and chinups chips
>>
>>51155593
>I literally did not read SS and have no idea it includes adding accessories once you're sufficiently strong enough: the post
>>
>>51155478
>A decent critique. Over the first two years of a lifter however, I'd rather they get a respectable bench and press, then add volume later. Pushing intensity early (ie, weight on the bar) helps them far more than adding sets or sessions. 25 total reps at 135 isn't going to do shit for hypertrophy.
That's really stupid though, because getting a respectable bench and press REQUIRES that you use lots of extra volume work.

Linear progression hardly builds strength on its own. Its more useful purpose is peaking for a powerlifting meet. The problem with making beginners do it is that they're basically working to get to their current peak strength, without having built any muscle on their body first.

What actually takes you past your current max strength is varying up your program with exercise variations and added volume to stimulate muscle growth, while including low reps (1-5RM) simply to keep your CNS trained to use the muscle that you've built with volume work.

Don't drink the Rippletits koolaid, it's bad for you.
>>
>>51155593
>quoting arnold's training routine
>when he's a notorious roid user
ok
>>
>>51154670
kek
>>
>>51155593
>dude just train like the roid users do what could go wrong
>>
>>51155593
>>51155594
>>51155601
>>51155613
>>51155616
>>51155649
Here’s the picture we’re painting – If you care about upper body aesthetics (like basically everybody does), strength, or balance, SS and SL are absolutely terrible choices.

Further compounding this problem is the fact that you’re doing a ton of squatting in both routines compared to the volume of upper body work. Over two weeks, you’re doing 18-30 (SS/SL) sets of squats. Your legs will grow more than your entire upper body, and you will look ridiculous for it. This result is so widespread and commonplace that the term “T-Rex Mode” was quite literally coined because of Starting Strength.

Meanwhile, the deadlift volume is so low you may as well not be doing deadlifts at all. 3 sets over two weeks for a very important lift for developing strength and muscle in your posterior chain is indefensible. But it’s defended anyway – citing “excessive fatigue”. The only problem with this is that CNS fatigue is a bogeyman which is wildly overstated and there is no reason to be afraid of it when deadlifting.
>>
>>51154640
holy fucking CNS fatigue.
enjoy burning out if you don't injure yourself first on your way to becoming An Hero
>>
>>51155665
>hasn't read the book, the people he's replying to, or the site
my sides
>>
I swear to God every retard who bashes SS has not done the program or read the sticky. I ran it for 5 months and am fine. Goddamn dyels fuck off.
>>
>>51155694
Are you mad that you fell for a meme routine and don't have an argument or any resemblance of lifting despite lifting for 5 years? Or is this sexual frustration?
>>
>>51155665
>>51155694
>>51155709
>>51155715
The way they handle stalls is nonsensical
This is an arena in which SL significantly outshines SS in being ridiculous. In both programs, if you miss completing all the prescribed reps (twice for SS, three times for SL), you remove 10% of the weight for that lift and work your way back up. As Greg Nuckols very eloquently puts it:

What’s supposed to happen in the couple of weeks while you build back to your old plateau? Is that when the gains fairy visits to defy the basic principle of progressive overload, thereby granting you a substantially improved response to the exact same stimulus?

But SL takes this a step further – If you continue to stall, you are supposed to reduce your already low total volume to 3 sets of 5, then 3 sets of 3, and finally to a single set of 5. This goes beyond simply nonsensical and into “Quite Literally Knowing Nothing About Training” territory.

As Nuckols points out in the above article, the scientific literature agrees almost unanimously on the importance of volume for driving strength and muscle growth. What SL prescribes for dealing with a stall is nearly the polar opposite of everything that you should actually do – add volume, use different rep ranges, increase work capacity. Greg Nuckols discusses the trap of reducing volume further in his article on work capacity:
>>
>>51155715
oh no no the dyelfags are seething
>>
File: come on dude.jpg (14 KB, 323x403)
14 KB
14 KB JPG
>it's an "SS means you need to do GOMAD" thread
that is specifically only recommended for skeletors who have difficulty eating more the normal way. I don't know why people keep propagating this meme.
>>
>>51155749
>>51155751
>>51155760
So, lo and behold, they dial back their training volume and the gains start coming again. Only they last for a mere 4-8 weeks. Then they plateau even harder. Why? They weren’t getting stronger. They were peaking. Their body was accustomed to a certain level of work. When they reduced the amount of work, supercompensation happened, and they could put more weight on the bar. However, that’s not something that happens indefinitely. But, the fact is, it “worked” for a while, so this person ends up banging their head against a wall on a super low volume routine wondering why they’re not getting any stronger, not questioning the efficacy of their new routine because it worked initially.

Emphasis ours.
>>
>>51155800
1) not related to what I wrote
2) SS is a beginner program. You're only supposed to do it until noob gains exhaust, then move on to an intermediate program. If you're constantly stalling on SS and doing it for way too long like a year or some shit, you're doing it wrong.
>>
>>51155613
>getting a respectable bench and press REQUIRES that you use lots of extra volume work.

True, you have to do more. Volume as in tonnage creeps up throughout the course of linear progression.

>What actually takes you past your current max strength is varying up your program with exercise variations and added volume to stimulate muscle growth,

You're half correct. Over time, you must do more work. There comes a point where you need to tinker with exercise variation and wave volume and intensity. That point is not when a lifter is a novice with no experience. Why would you complicate things when approaching your programming simply will result in superior strength, and ultimately muscular, gains?
>>
>>51155800
>>51155917
>>51155935
They neglect all aspects of strength development except one
Mark Rippetoe, author of Starting Strength, is famous on the internet for his quote about “pounds on the bar through full range of motion”. The extreme emphasis on “pounds on the bar” in these programs is a detriment to long term strength (and especially athletic) development – both physically and mentally.

On the physical side, the problem is that all other aspects of training – such as cardio, conditioning, periodization, and work capacity – are neglected in the extreme. The authors of both routines actively try to discourage trainees from doing cardio because it could affect “pounds on the bar” – despite the fact that regularly doing cardio can improve your recovery between sets, which helps you get more volume done in the same time frame, reduces injury risk, and, when done appropriately, will not interfere with your gains at all. The routines themselves suffer from using a single stagnant set x rep scheme and contain no periodization, which scientific study has concluded is almost always superior to non-periodized training. Finally, a trainee is told to rest as long as they feel is necessary in order to hit their target reps on the next set, which is detrimental to building work capacity.

The results of this neglect are something we have seen on r/Fitness and other beginner forums over and over. Regardless of how much they squat, trainees are completely out of shape and have become almost allergic to doing anything that might compromise “pounds on the bar” – no matter how temporary the reduction may be. Reducing rest times, adding cardio and conditioning, adding more volume – all of these things have near immediate negative impacts because the trainee’s work and recovery capacities are so low. They must take several steps back in order to handle the changes that are necessary to continue to grow.
>>
>>51155665
low IQ poster. The novice trainee responds to literally anything in the beginning. A truly undermuscled or elderly trainee can start with 1 work set in each lift and progress by adding weight to that, and then volume. 3 pressing slots per week are plenty for a novice. For the first 8-12 weeks, an appropriately supervised LP has 3 pressing slots, 3 squatting slots, 3 pulling slots. The only accessory added at this point is the chinup, bodyweight permitting to 3x a week. For a novice, they went from 0 sets per week to 9 (12 - chins included). You are an absolute retarded mongoloid if you believe that the novice needs more than this to progress for any sustainable period of time. Towards the end of the LP, a light squat day is added on wednesday, powercleans are alternated with the deadlift, and backoff sets are added to the pressing movements.
The reason that deadlift volume isn't added early on, is because it's not necessary. A trainee at a 185dl going to 195 isn't going to magically get there faster by adding more volume. He's going to get there anyways. The secret sauce to add to novice programming is literally just Time. He can get to 195 by just taking a rest day from Wednesday to Friday. If you're judging the SSLP as an intermediate program, then that's a different problem.
>>
>>51155953
>>51156002
The discouragement and aversion that comes from the above is only the beginning of the mental side of the problems with focusing on only a single dimension of progression. Some of the common mental or motivational roadblocks that happen as a result of training this way for a prolonged period of time are:

With only one measure of progression, any reduction in “pounds on the bar” often ends up feeling like an absolute loss of progress. Deloading can feel like a punishment for failure instead of its intended purpose (though misguided implementation) – to help drive further progress.
It can ingrain a need to see clear progress every training session, which is a reality that only absolute novices can realize and then only very briefly on the scale of a training career. This can cause discouragement and an aversion to any program that does not “progress as fast” (such as: most programs by reputable coaches) as the trainee believes they are doing on routines that add weight every session.
The dogmatism from the authors of these programs can cause trainees to convince themselves that, when they inevitably stall out (frequently hard), it is not the program that is wrong but they themselves. They can begin to blame factors such as genetics, proportions, or leverages, which are non-actionable and largely overblown. Worse, sometimes the conclusion (often with the help of other novices) is made that they’re not eating enough, and they start eating so far beyond their body’s ability to build muscle that they get very fat.
>>
I'd highly recommend people interested in a reasoned, measured, logical rebuttal to many of these points listen to the Barbell Logic podcast's first 5 episodes.
>>
>>51155935
>True, you have to do more. Volume as in tonnage creeps up throughout the course of linear progression.
3x5 at a heavy weight is not volume. Volume is adding several sets of tricep extensions, curls, facepulls, cable rows, etc after your heavy work. Anyone who trains should be doing the maximum volume that they can recover from.

>>51155935
>There comes a point where you need to tinker with exercise variation and wave volume and intensity. That point is not when a lifter is a novice with no experience.
Arguable. Rippetoe's word is not God, different coaches have different approaches to training beginners. See Sheiko novice routine. Sheiko is considered one of the greatest coaches of all time.
He emphasizes GPP and exposure to many different exercises because beginners need to become coordinated athletes in general rather than being specialized in a few movements and being useless outside of that.
Reminder that Sheiko explicitly includes "sports" in his routine, while Rip's programming was originally intended for football players who can't handle combining intense football practice with high volume in the weight room.

>Why would you complicate things when approaching your programming simply will result in superior strength, and ultimately muscular, gains?
Because it doesn't. Reminder that the best example Rip could come up with was Zach Evetts, who gained 40lbs of fat.
Improving your leverages by becoming obese is one way of becoming "strong," but I'd wager that people who aren't football players would rather build muscle, which is what's actually moving the weight.
>>
>>51155749
Low iq poster round 2. You're new to coaching. No SSC does resets for a 100% compliant trainee who has diet/sleep/life stress in check. Resets are recommended as people are often literally not doing the program. They're taking too large weight increases, doing poorly programmed conditioning work outside of the the SSLP, having external life stresses (fight with wife, 12 hour work days etc), skipping workouts, or have dogshit form. You are correct in that training stress needs to increase over time, but you're sperging out and conflating gen pop recommendations with training theory. If I was rip (I'm not) and 99/100 times a reset is needed for the above reasons, I'm going to blanket recommend a reset. Most trainees do not answer the first 3 questions as they're unsupervised and, well there are more ways to do things wrong than right.

A second reason for the peaking at the end of the LP, is to spur an interest in training. Working to triples, then singles, then having a mock meet is a great way to have your trainee full realize the fruits of their labor. When your trainee is used to adding 15lbs a week to their lifts and start to stall, they start to think things are going wrong (most novices don't understand the intermediate stage). So if you can keep them motivated by giving them something to work towards (mock meet) while also adding weight to the bar, the person tends to really love the process, which is one of the main goals. The novice LP is a blip on the timeline of training. 4-5 months of a year, over a 40 year training career. The training nuances really don't matter as much as you think. What matters is getting them strong, so when they're pulling 450 at the end of the LP, and are stronger than 99% of the gymgoing population, they're going to keep training.
>>
>>51156103
>3x5 at a heavy weight is not volume.
Yes it is. Volume is sets x reps x weights. The only thing that isn't volume is not working out. The volume increases in SS over time. Agreed?

>Sheiko
I'd agree to some extent with your points here. It may be beneficial for a lifter to avoid early specialization, though there is no conclusive evidence either way. Although I wonder if the more athletic and well rounded lifters Sheiko receives (ie, they show up more athletic than most before they start lifting) may benefit more from this than a couch potato.

>Football players
No its not.

>Zach
Check out the SS forums and SS Coaches and their results. I'd love to see anyone compare AVERAGE results with SS.
>>
File: doubt.png (41 KB, 600x358)
41 KB
41 KB PNG
>>51156200
>If I was rip (I'm not)
>>
I feel like the majority of criticisms of SS are answered in Practical Programming; you may not agree with the routine, but the logic behind it is absolutely sound, and reading it will give you a better understanding of the training methodology necessary to potentially build a better novice routine
>>
>>51153942
It’s a good book, especially for form tips, but it’s not the fucking bible. You don’t have to follow every word and letter. And really, if you didn’t read the whole book, you’re not gonna understand the reasoning and you’re not gonna get the right results.
>>
>>51155953
Low iq poster round 3. Pounds on the bar is the most tangible way for us to address the concept of strength. The NLP doesn't need to address cardio and conditioning. For an untrained person going from 0 sets of work a week to 12 sets/session, their conditioning is going to improve. Again, a 4-5 month attempt at an LP is an incredibly small amount of time. Cardio and conditioning can be addressed later. Once a baseline level of strength (and increased muscular bodyweight) is achieved, the cardio work can be funneled in. You can be big and strong with good cardio in 6 months, or you can try and spin every plate at once and get mediocre results at all of them at the tail end of a year. Again, you're working with people, not an ideal client in a vaccuum.
As for periodization and work capacity, why on earth would a novice need to focus on those? Their work capacity went from 0 sets a week, to 12 sets 3/week. That's a huge increase in work capacity. Work capacity needs to be increased such that the trainee can handle more volume. The novice trainee doesn't need more volume. Once they need more volume, they shouldn't be doing the NLP anymore.

This line here:
>periodization, which scientific study has concluded is almost always superior to non-periodized training
is a dead giveaway that you don't understand anyone's training theory. Go ask Mike isratael, chris beardsley, eric helms, and gnuckols if a rank novice trainee needs complex periodized programming. They'll tell them to find something simple, and do it. The recommendation of 'some for a few' is incredibly relevant here. The novice trainee needs something simple to aid in compliance and learn their way around a barbell.
>>
>>51156229
>Yes it is. Volume is sets x reps x weights. The only thing that isn't volume is not working out. The volume increases in SS over time. Agreed?
It doesn't matter if you're maxing out with 3x5, you aren't doing the most volume that it's possible to recover from.
The reason most people who do SS stall 3 times at around the same weight is because without sufficient volume or the use of an exercise variant, your muscles aren't getting enough of a growth stimulus.
So Rip recommends that you "eat your way through plateaus," meaning that you gain enough fat to improve your leverages so you can squeeze out a few more pounds on the bar.

>I'd agree to some extent with your points here. It may be beneficial for a lifter to avoid early specialization, though there is no conclusive evidence either way.
There is no reason to specialize in general unless you're training for powerlifting.
Being strong in very specific axes of movement doesn't always translate to sports, where you use numerous axes of movement, often in asymmetrical positions that have far more resemblance to a lunge than a squat.
Nor does being great at 3 sets of 5 confer any benefit when it comes to endurance work, which is an element in the vast majority of sports. The body adapts to the stimulus that it is given.

>Although I wonder if the more athletic and well rounded lifters Sheiko receives (ie, they show up more athletic than most before they start lifting) may benefit more from this than a couch potato.
The point of his programming is to take someone who is uncoordinated and make them coordinated by having them learn how their bodies work with various movements.

>No its not.
Read Starting Strength 1st edition, it was written specifically for football coaches.

>Check out the SS forums and SS Coaches and their results. I'd love to see anyone compare AVERAGE results with SS.
They're not showing you the countless people who have gotten subpar results or injuries with the program, obviously.
>>
>>51156035
low IQ poster round 4. Jfeig is that you? edition.
This entirely depends on the coach's framing to the trainee. It's hard to navigate around your strawman in the second text block. That's entirely possible for trainees to think that way, and for it to impact them negatively. It's my job as a coach to make sure that doesn't happen. One of my primary functions as a coach, is that when my trainee is out of the LP and into early intermediate programming, I've taught them enough training theory for them such that they understand the next stages of their career.

The dogmatism of the authors is a meme. People have their opinions and defend them because they believe in them. Them not changing their minds when people disagree with them is not dogmatic. Often times the failure of a program is a failure of the trainee. I've had plenty of novices who drink through the weekend, undereat and undersleep, and are genuinely confused when their monday workout suffers. Again, we're not coaching in a vacuum. People are people, once in a blue moon you'll get an incredibly motivated young cerebral athlete, where you can apply much more textbook training principles. More often than not, people are screwing up enough to limit a programs effectiveness. Again, this is the role of the coach to judge this, and modulate accordingly.
>>
>>51156406
>For an untrained person going from 0 sets of work a week to 12 sets/session, their conditioning is going to improve.
But not much, and conditioning and work capacity can be built be that early on.

>Once a baseline level of strength (and increased muscular bodyweight) is achieved, the cardio work can be funneled in.
Your increased bodyweight is not going to as muscular as you think. Also if you follow the SS gospel of doing Texas method after SS there wont be any cardio.

>You can be big and strong with good cardio in 6 months, or you can try and spin every plate at once and get mediocre results at all of them at the tail end of a year. Again, you're working with people, not an ideal client in a vaccuum.
Adding in two light sessions of cardio after a month or two and then increasing the cardio on a weekly basis is not going to interfere with your progress.

>That's a huge increase in work capacity. Work capacity needs to be increased such that the trainee can handle more volume. The novice trainee doesn't need more volume. Once they need more volume, they shouldn't be doing the NLP anymore.
They do need more volume. Because SSLP with a huge caloric surplus creates fat fucks with a nervous system that is highly primed in to 4 different exercises with less carry over to other exercises then the trainee thinks.

>Go ask Mike isratael, chris beardsley, eric helms, and gnuckols if a rank novice trainee needs complex periodized programming
Adding a work set a week and then taking week 6 or 8 with less sets then the previous weeks for some recovery to happen is not exactly complex programming.
>>
>>51156536
>>51156406
Holy mother of all that is good please have sex.
>>
>>51156536
>Often times the failure of a program is a failure of the trainee. I've had plenty of novices who drink through the weekend, undereat and undersleep, and are genuinely confused when their monday workout suffers. Again, we're not coaching in a vacuum.

>Again, we're not coaching in a vacuum.
EXACTLY! your trainees will not have perfect conditions to train under, they won't have a perfect diet, they won't have perfect sleep, they won't have a perfect stress free life and their training performance is going to vary and reflect that which is why it makes sense to use some sort of auto regulation. Expecting to set a new record every time they train is expecting them to live in a perfect vacuum of only training and recovering under optimal conditions something which very very rarely happens.
>>
>>51156652
It isn't, its someone explaining their viewpoints in a good which is causing some actual discussion around training to happen. Kind of the point of this forum. Your post on the other hand.... Its holy mother please have a self inflicted death asap
>>
>>51156715
Lol are you mad that I told you to have sex?
>>
>>51156406
>is a dead giveaway that you don't understand anyone's training theory. Go ask Mike isratael, chris beardsley, eric helms, and gnuckols if a rank novice trainee needs complex periodized programming.
Funny you would say that because if you google Eric Helm's and mike Israetel templates you'll see they using periodization in their novice templates.
>>
>>51153942

>Don't buy Rippetoe's book, buy mine instead
What a loser.

Besides, anybody who is not doing SL with added arm work is a fucking neanderthal, and in a bad way.
>>
>>51156599
it's me again. Go back to bbm jfeig.

For an untrained person going from 0 sets of work a week to 12 sets/session, their conditioning is going to improve.
>But not much, and conditioning and work capacity can be built be that early on.
Not much for who? Why can't it be built later? Is it suboptimal? Suboptimal for what?

Once a baseline level of strength (and increased muscular bodyweight) is achieved, the cardio work can be funneled in.
>Your increased bodyweight is not going to as muscular as you think. Also if you follow the SS gospel of doing Texas method after SS there wont be any cardio.
I don't understand your point here, I'm not sure there is one. How would you like me to respond to that first remark? So?
As for the gospel remark, this is a clear strawman. Also not sure what your desired result was.

You can be big and strong with good cardio in 6 months, or you can try and spin every plate at once and get mediocre results at all of them at the tail end of a year. Again, you're working with people, not an ideal client in a vaccuum.
>Adding in two light sessions of cardio after a month or two and then increasing the cardio on a weekly basis is not going to interfere with your progress.
This would be a perfectly acceptable way to add in cardio, I've dome similar schemes. This is not what the typical trainee does. A huge portion of the exercise community follows a more is better approach, and most people who get into the LP are former crossfitters or cardio bunnies. Generally you have the hold the leash pretty tight. I'm assuming we both understand the current evidence on interference effects, but I'm not talking about higher level athletes performing very strenuous conditioning.

1/2
>>
>>51156599
>>51157065
2/2
That's a huge increase in work capacity. Work capacity needs to be increased such that the trainee can handle more volume. The novice trainee doesn't need more volume. Once they need more volume, they shouldn't be doing the NLP anymore.
>They do need more volume. Because SSLP with a huge caloric surplus creates fat fucks with a nervous system that is highly primed in to 4 different exercises with less carry over to other exercises then the trainee thinks.
They need more volume for what? Progress? Your strawman for the huge caloric surplus indicates you think that barbell training is useful from a caloric expenditure standpoint. (hint, it's not. eat less). The 4 different exercises in the NLP carry over to other exercises and athletic endeavors by virtue of building muscle mass and general strength. A novice trainee walking around at 145 with 95/75/135 s/b/d 1st day (relatively common numbers) and ends at 190 with 300/230/385 is more useful and his newly found bodyweight has more carryover than finely honing in his exercise ability and retarding the strength acquisition process.

Go ask Mike isratael, chris beardsley, eric helms, and gnuckols if a rank novice trainee needs complex periodized programming
>Adding a work set a week and then taking week 6 or 8 with less sets then the previous weeks for some recovery to happen is not exactly complex programming.
I don't even know what the above scheme is attempting to simplify. Do you think periodization is adding a blanket set a week, then vaguely deloading is periodization?
>>
If you weren't retarded you would realise that by doing so few exercises it allows you to make progress on them at a considerable rate and to harness noob gains effectively to build a good strength base. If you're adding cable flies you aren't doing the fucking program and won't make proper progress. Name one program that will let you reach intermediate strength standards as fast as SS.
>>
Honestly, best way to add upper body volume on SS is to do 5x5 on upper body, keeping 3x5 on squats and 1x5 (or 2x3) on deadlifts (not to be confused with SL -- 5x5 on PR squats 3x a week is insane)
>>
>>51154237
Post body and lifts retard
>>
>>51156690
The coach provides the auto regulation if they're there. Most novices don't know what the concept of hard is. When you have trainees bailing on rep 3 of a set that to a trained eye is RPE 7, you'll understand why a novice shouldn't be near RPE for quite some time. They use RPE whether they know it or not, and the coach draws that information out of them, but I feel it's ill advised to make hard programming decisions based off of it.

>>51156746
Eric helms novice programs have 1rm % considerations. They're not novice programs. They're programs for people who have fucked around in the gym and have theoretical 1rms. Different discussion. Samesame with Israetel. You're using periodization in an odd vague, hand waivey way. I said complex periodized programs based off of
>51155953

I'm not entirely sure we're talking about the same thing.
>>
>>51154578
LOL for real?
>>
>adding 2.5-5kg a week to your bench and OHP
>”you won’t make upper body gains on it! Do this dogshit bro-split instead!”
>>
>>51154237
>It has no hypertrophy
It's almost as if the program is for strength instead of aesthetics. You're pretty much saying it's a bad program because it doesn't do what it's not trying to do.
>>
>>51153942
>49 posters
Summer fit is so easy to troll. Just look at all of these walls of texts these dyels posted.
>>
>>51154640
>ARMS day following shoulder day
Aren't you gonna overtrain your triceps that way? Hitting them on OHP, then hitting them on skullcrusher, pushdowns, and dips?
>>
>>51157531
I love DYEL posts like these
>>
>>51155478
>"Hypertrophy work" is useless for beginners who need to use pink dumbells to get eight to twelve reps. See above.
"Strength work" is useless for beginners who need to use 5 lbs plates to get 5 reps.
>>
>thinking you're going to look like your favourite IG fake natty if you follow an “aesthetics” program that doesn’t involves needles in the delts
The big natties are the strong natties, anything else is a waste of time.
>>
>>51157582
You're the one who's too weak to generate any productive stress
>>
>>51154707
Every novice training in any sport starts from some volume in GPP
>>
>>51155240
>SAGE GOES IN ALL FIELDS
You didn't even put it in the name field, you retard.
>>
>>51157723
Can it dyel.
>>
>>51157737
Most sports need to work endurance and coordination more than strength. Also a lot of sports coaches are boomers who still trust the meme routine their own high school coaches made up 40 years ago.
>>
>>51157783
Post bench
>>
>>51157846
315
>>
File: consider.jpg (24 KB, 508x412)
24 KB
24 KB JPG
Semi-related. Would you guys be interested if I condensed and updated the entire sticky in a neatly organized website? Could work on it as a side project.
>>
>>51157723
t. maxes out with my warmups
>>
>>51158247
Fuck no, the sticky is at least 60% bullshit and has been outdated for years
>>
>>51158326
Post stats larper
>>
>>51154237
>most people in gainit
wait is this pasta???????????
>>
>>51158247
Depends. Post body, lifts, and how long you’ve been training. We’ll see if you’re worthy
>>
>>51158340
250/157.5/280 (kg) s/b/d
>>
>>51158356
Yup, straight from Reddit
>>
File: me right now.jpg (71 KB, 912x1024)
71 KB
71 KB JPG
>>51158329
Hence the "update" part.
>>51158357
Here's a selfie.
>>
>>51154195
Lmao
>>
File: CPoupqOUAAAifKQ.jpg (30 KB, 500x504)
30 KB
30 KB JPG
>tfw anon didn't give me any more (You)'s after I btfo'd him with my lifts
>>
>>51158372
220/125/200 (I know) at 90kg
Technically warming up with your maxes
>>
>>51158506
Wtf why can't you deadlift more?
>>
>>51154237
t. didn’t read the book
>>
>>51158494
dumb frog poster
>>
What would anyone suggest to someone like me who is fat and pretty much has 0 muscle?
>>
>>51158541
program https://www.barbellmedicine.com/the-beginner-prescription/

diet https://www.barbellmedicine.com/584-2/
>>
>>51158532
Impatient frog poster.
>>
>>51158528
I KNOW
I'm still doing 3 day texas method, and after intensity squats and bench on Friday I'm wrecked and can only pull so much
>>
SS is perfect in what it tries to do.
It's called Starting Strength, not Starting Aesthetics or Intermediate Strength.
>>
>>51158541
Unironically read Starting Strength. You'll have the knowledge you need to perform the big 4 and you'll be informed enough to have a better guess of what programming to follow.
>>
>>51158583
Most people want to get strong, look good and actually be healthy rather than getting obese. So it doesn't really belong on a fitness board.
>>
File: 1552426774249.jpg (101 KB, 720x960)
101 KB
101 KB JPG
>>51158563
Do the 4 day split from PPST
>>
>>51157811
>Also a lot of sports coaches are boomers who still trust the meme routine their own high school coaches made up 40 years ago.
Yeah, and some zoomer from anonymous forum knows better how to train people in high rivalry sport then educated professional. Shut the fuck up and learn https://www.powerliftingtowin.com/sheiko-novice-routine/
>>
>>51158688
>>
>>51158563
Pull back on your volume day squats, put a light pulling accessory there (power cleans or DE pulls)
Drop your wednesday light day squats entirely and make that your deadlift intensity day. Your intensity squat day should be rotating enough to keep it all RPE9 at most, no bone on bone grinders. Use remaining energy after bench to get in volume for your deadlifts.
>>
>>51158541
stay away from rippletits and do PPL or blaha's 5x5 while eating at a caloric deficit.
you are free to swap out back squats for front squats, conventional deads for trap bar, barbell rows for any row variation if you want. enjoy your freedom
>>
>>51158702
I'm not the one deadlifting 20kg less than I squat
>>
>>51156229
>Volume is sets x reps x weights
LMAO retard, volume is sets x reps at given intensity zone, sets x reps x weights is tonnage and it is found to be useless from like 70's
>>
>>51158700
Sheiko has always been faulted for his sampling bias m8. His w1d1 routine has the trainee doing 36 pullups. You're high out of your mind if you think this is appropriately scaled for a novice trainee. It literally has you going from 0 sets/week to 30 sets ON THE FIRST WORKOUT. Regardless of how this is divided among body parts, this is a really dumb way to approach novice training.
>>
>>51158541
If you want to build strength, seriously read SS. Don’t skim, don’t read bits and pieces, read and understand everything Rip is trying to teach because he’s got a lot of insight into the world of strength from a powerlifter’s perspective. If you wanna be Zeez mode, do the lifts 3x10 and work in some isolations for definition in whatever areas you want to target. Also for the latter, cut until you’re lean and stay lean. If your goal is just “not fat” then do cardio and calisthenics.
>>
>>51155098
Chin ups are part of SS, you fucking mongoloid, holy shit
>>
>>51158704
I don't want to do 4 day because of my schedule but we'll see

I do 3x5 at 180kg on Monday, Bench Volume and 3x3 Snatch Grip deadlifts (obviously lighter)

Wednesday is now Front Squats (only 100kg but feels heavy) and floor press

Friday squats rotate between Triple, Two Double and Five singles. I'll see about pulling it back.

>>51158726
>>51158702
Kek, this wasn't me
>>
I love reading these threads and seeing how many people who have never actually read anything about SS

>Needs more than 1x deadlift
>needs something like chin ups
>MUH BICEP curls

fucking hilarious
>>
>>51158777
Good luck anon, don't end up with a runaway squat compared to your bench and deadlift.
>>
>>51158809
It used to be even more runaway, I'll do some serious rethinking on my next deload.
Are you running 4-day TM?
>>
>>51158824
I'm not, I'm doing my own thing but looking back at it there's a period of my training when I wish I had done a couple of years ago
>>
>>51158840
Too stubborn to go to more advance programming yet, so I'll try 4-day TM in your stead
>>
>>51158789
Learn to read, retard, there is much more points than this
>>
>>51158736
>farts
>>
>>51158736
If you can't do it with bodyweight you just do them assisted. It isn't that difficult.
>>
>>51158777
You seem not retarded. Post a throwaway email if you want a prolonged programming discussion. Working through TM is incredibly interesting and lots to talk about. Should end up looking like
M - Volume Squat - Volume Bench - Fast Pull
W - Dead Intensity - Press Volume - Chins
F - Squat Intensity - Bench Intensity - Dead Volume

This is the barebones schedule once your squat starts killing the rest of your lifts. I'd add in a few more things given your conditioning is appropriate. On Friday, I'd add in LTEs or a Fast Press after your Bench intensity or mixed in with deadlift volume. Don't let the workouts take a long time. You should be able to alternate your DE pulls on monday and your Friday has very few S/B sets.
>>
>>51158884
And, retard? I'm only addressing the retards who pretend to know what they are talking about. Stop being an offended little faggot.
>>
>>51158736
This is example program
>>
>>51158900
The point seems to be going over your head. If you assume that a Day 1 novice (remember this is someone who is NEW to exercise) should do THIRTY SETS OF WORK on their first day, you've clearly never coached. This is a great way to cripple your trainee for the next four days. Excellent for long term buy in.
>>
>>51154474
>It's a great foundation for strength
There is only one great foundation for strength - freestyle wrestling
>>
>>51158936
Maybe with a fucking Gorilla
>>
What are realistic expectations for finishing SS after about 6 months? I got a while to go on most of my lifts, but even with a few deloads and switching to 2x3 from 1x5, I've maxed out at around 300 lbs 2x3 @ 180
I'm thinking of changing my DL to intermediate, but if my numbers are abysmally low I'll try to stick it out
>>
>>51158924
which one? the novice program he posted above is 6x6 on day 1. why would he have another program that has you do 30 sets before his novice program.
>>
>>51155254
>Encouraging complete noobs to go to failure
>what is AMRAP? It is not going to failure?!?!?!
>>
>>51155504
>I'd rather get a novice to a 300 lbs squat plateau in 3 months
Yeah, 65 kg guy will reach 150 kg in squat in 3 months for sure
>>
>>51155601
>simply listing exercises in the end of the book means they are in the program
ok, retard
>>
>>51159037
>t. skimmed it
>>
>>51158984
Are you high?
Box Squats - 8 sets
DB Bench - 6 sets
DB Flies - 5 sets
Pullups - 6 sets
Leg Raises - 5 sets

This is a "Novice" program that has 30 sets for the first day of the routine. A few options here. To complete it, you'll be likely using hysterically low weights, and if you don't they'll have horrible doms. Most new trainees get doms from 3 sets of squats. If you think introducing a trainee to exercise and having them do 30 sets on the first day is a good idea, you've never coached. This is not a novice program. Sheiko doesn't coach rank novices. If you call it an "example" program like another poster, then that's just no true scottsman.
>>
>>51159082
>Box Squats - 8 sets
minus two warm up sets
>DB Bench - 6 sets
so what? there is no other presses during the day
>Pullups - 6 sets
yeah, with 6 fucking reps
>>
>>51159082
>Sheiko doesn't coach rank novices.
>Sheiko doesn't coach 3d-1d grades powerlifters
>Sheiko doesn't coach candidates to master of sports powerlifters
ok, retard
>>
>>51159120
Are you the low IQ BBM poster?
I have a feeling that this isn't going anywhere, but the untrained person will receive a beneficial training stimulus from a very low number of sets. "Beginner" programs like these are the equivalent of cosmo crash diets and juice fasts.
>box squats
Your point is that it's only 6 sets instead of 8, wow. What a huge difference.
>DB Bench
Right. the DB fly and the DB bench are completely unrelated.
>pullups
I would wager that 1 in 20 true novices can do a pullup.

The volume is entirely inappropriate for a novice. If you can't see this, please read:
Scientific principles of Strength & Conditioning
Starting Strength
Practical Programming for Strength Training
Muscle & Strength Pyramids
>>
>>51159082
>If you call it an "example" program like another poster, then that's just no true scottsman.
What's wrong with example program?
>>
File: Kronk Bait.png (151 KB, 1000x630)
151 KB
151 KB PNG
>>51153942

>Add chin ups

Chin ups are already in the program. They are explicitly part of the program. The book clearly tells you to fucking do them. Why is every SS critic completely illiterate? Is this article a parody? Did I get worked?
>>
>>51153942
> can't understand why SS is recommend in sticky anyway

Gingermod took the password to change it to his grave when he anhero’d
>>
>>51154670
Chuckle
>>
>>51159207
>Your point is that it's only 6 sets instead of 8, wow. What a huge difference.
>Oh, only 5 sets instead of 6. What a huge difference.
>Oh, only 4 sets instead of 5. What a huge difference. >Oh, only 3 sets instead of 4. What a huge difference.
Ok, retard. And yeah, there is huge difference between 6 and 8 sets.
>DB fly
They are done for stretching with light weights
>I would wager that 1 in 20 true novices can do a pullup
That's why it is example program.
>The volume is entirely inappropriate for a novice. If you can't see this, please read:
>Scientific principles of Strength & Conditioning
LMAO at you retard, I read it and in it literally written that beginners should not do heavy compounds with barbells. Zatsiorsky suggests new lifters spend several years of bodyweight GPP.
>Starting Strength
>Practical Programming for Strength Training
I read this books, it's literally rubbish from nonames with no any coaching achievements.
>Muscle & Strength Pyramids
Didn't read it. Another meme shit tier book?
>>
>>51159207
>Starting Strength
>do the sets of f-fifth because of M-MUH EMG
>I'm so scientific!
>>
>>51159346
>Zatsiorsky
You're talking about this book.
Science and Practice of Strength Training

I'm talking about this book:
https://www.jtsstrength.com/product/scientific-principles-of-strength-training/

You haven't address my primary argument, that this program is entirely too much volume for a beginner. You're nitpicking about specifics as if they're addressing my point. You clearly haven't read SS or PPST, since you're talking around my points & the major concepts presented in the books.
>>
>>51159392
Is this a troll? No one in the SS camp uses EMG data for anything, as it's not super relevant for strength training novices. Sets of 5 are used as a good point between energy systems, and a good point for real time coaching.
>>
>>51159082
>To complete it, you'll be likely using hysterically low weights
>beginners will gain muscle from doing anything
So there is literally no problem with beginners using weights within their abilities. More form practice = better.

FYI sheiko isn't the only higher volume program, juggernaut method is another one with a beginner variation which has the same total weekly volume as sheiko
more form practice and conditioning is a good thing.
>>
>>51153942
Just fucking add in the curls, the shoulder work and chest assitence anyways.
I hit my arms every training day with one assistance for chest if i did bench that day, one back, and shoulder raises if it was ohp day, i also do planks for abs. I changed the rows with weighted chin ups. It is better than anyother stupid bro split i ever ran. If you are adding weight to the bar everyweek, you are building muscle after you max out on beginner/technique gains. SS is good just dont be stupid
>>
>>51159466
What is training economy?
>>
>>51159501
since we're talking about the rank novice who can't even do a pullup, if you want to get him coordinated and up to speed, the fastest way to do it is to make him do lots of reps and GPP.

making him do heavy squats every week while chasing a PR like rip prescribes is a recipe for disaster.
>>
>>51159533
>making him do heavy squats
He's a novice, they aren't heavy, he'll recover extremely quickly.
>>
>>51159533
>have your trainee go from squatting 95lbs to 110lbs in the same week
>This PR chasing is dangerous!
Having him do 30 sets of work is surely better, since more is better, right? Why stop there. Go for 35 sets. Maybe 40. There's a minimum effective volume for every trainee on the spectrum of athleticism. There is also a maximum volume for every trainee, which when surpassed becomes a negative stimulus rather than productive. Operating at the lower threshhold for novices makes more sense.
>>
>>51159572
not even about recovery, it's about the fact that the novice is uncoordinated and probably shouldn't be working at the edge of his ability to get 5RM PRs before he even has any considerable training under his belt. this is how injuries happen
>>
>>51159616
you and I both know that novices are encouraged to reach numbers well above 225lbs on the back squat.
>Having him do 30 sets of work is surely better, since more is better, right? Why stop there. Go for 35 sets. Maybe 40.
strawman. the maximum amount of volume that they can recover from is the ideal range.
nor do any of the routines have them do 40 sets, they stop around 30.
>>
File: emg.jpg (217 KB, 988x760)
217 KB
217 KB JPG
>>51159420
>You clearly haven't read SS or PPST
This is bullshit and you are liar kike, go kill yourself. Starting Strength is literally Marxist Theory with it's own definitions and inventions like "beginners are trainees who can progress from workout to workout" (what? good coaches define complete beginners by training experience and by weight they can lift regarding powerlifting rankings), "beginners should progress as fast as possible" (see Zatsiorsky), "powercleans are good idea for untrained beginners" (even coaches of professional athletes think that powercleans are useless without full concentrating on olympic lifts, see Joe DeFranco), "you need minimal possible volume to allow you increase weights" (this is just shitty peaking of strength) and etc and etc.
There is shit tons of really good coaches that utilize periodization from the start, teaching progressions of lifts, for example for squat learning goblet squat, front squat then high bar squat.
Just imagine:
>professional coach
>whose specialization is
>NOVICE TRAINING
Rippetoe is kike, so are you.
>>51159441
go fuck yourself and die
>>
>>51159642
>you and I both know that novices are encouraged to reach numbers well above 225lbs on the back squat.
yes, and by that point they've already squatting 200,205,210,215 and 220.

Operating at the MRV is not ideal. When you've boosted the trainees load to their MRV, you have to have found their MRV. To do so, you've had to over-reach. To over-reach, you've had to have such a fatigue load where they have reduced performance for a series of weeks, generally 2 or 3 microcycles. In addition to sacrificing this, you also have to figure out where to go next. Once your trainee stalls with their training load at this MRV, you need to increase the stress. They're already strung out doing 30 sets a workout. Now you're increasing intensity? Bad move. Start with the volume lower and titrate it in as needed. Starting a novice off at this volume load is quite silly.
>>
>>51159679
>SS is literally Marxist theory
>>
>>51159704
>yes, and by that point they've already squatting 200,205,210,215 and 220.
yep. so they did 75 reps at moderate weight.
75 reps isn't enough to learn a skill. not even close

>Operating at the MRV is not ideal. When you've boosted the trainees load to their MRV, you have to have found their MRV. To do so, you've had to over-reach. To over-reach, you've had to have such a fatigue load where they have reduced performance for a series of weeks, generally 2 or 3 microcycles. In addition to sacrificing this, you also have to figure out where to go next. Once your trainee stalls with their training load at this MRV, you need to increase the stress. They're already strung out doing 30 sets a workout. Now you're increasing intensity? Bad move. Start with the volume lower and titrate it in as needed. Starting a novice off at this volume load is quite silly.
they're using ridiculously light weights, remember?
>>
>>51159679
You got me on the EMG image. In my speaking to SSCs they don't actively use it for programming considerations. Not incredibly relevant to the previous posts. I think we're referring to different editions as well. EMG blurb is 8-3 for me, your image is 8-4.

I'm not sure how I'm a kike, and I'm really not sure how SS is marxist theory. SS and PPST established their own definitions of training categories of novice/intermediate/advanced for taxonomic reasons that are very clearly laid out in the books. Your arguments in this post are not addressing any of the points laid out in the book, or my arguments. You just saying their are other coaches who disagree doesn't really impact anything. Sure, I'm sure have their valid reasons. In this conversation, you presenting your reasons outside of "shitty peaking". The NLP taking someone's squat from 95lbs to 275lbs is not peaking.

>or example for squat learning goblet squat, front squat then high bar squat.
Why? If I can coach my trainee to perform a mechanically A+ squat, why would I have them perform 3 variations prior. Training economy?

Also, most people in the entire world are novices who haven't touched a barbell. Extremely few people are athletes. SS (as named) is a novice program.
>>
>>51159620
>>51159533

This. The problem with SS as a beginner program is that it evangelizes like crazy the idea you should add weight to the bar each workout. He pimps some of his clients that were able to get to respectable squat numbers by adding weight each week. So new people that don't even have the flexibility to do the squat properly are hardly doing any volume at all but adding weight each workout. Just about everyone I have talked to that did SS had to reset their squat and/or injured themselves chasing the dreams of putting up big #s quickly.
>>
>>51159731
>they're using ridiculously light weights, remember?
Don't be difficult. I can add the condition of "operating at the MRV is not ideal "GIVEN TIME" " If that makes you happy.
Read further into the paragraph before being snippy.
>Once your trainee stalls with their training load at this MRV,
>>
>>51159847
>The NLP taking someone's squat from 95lbs to 275lbs
the noob's squat isn't literally 95lbs lol. it's only light because they haven't learned the motor pattern yet. their actual ability to generate force is not much lighter than 275lbs.
>>
>>51154237
>>51153942
post lifts and body or fuck off
>>
>>51159874
>>51159620
You start SS with a fucking empty bar, you dont hit an *actual* PR for several weeks into the program, by which time you'll have learned how to squat semi-decently.

My dad is 61 and managed this with minimal assistance, if a young man or teen cant then they are a GDE and should take up rock collecting or videogames.
>>
>>51159878
notice that sheiko doesn't specify to increase the load over time, because it isn't a linear progression. there is no need to add a specified amount of weight every workout, the beginner is learning how their body works and they aren't even using the same exercises workout-to-workout.
reminder that the goal of the program is to get the rank novice coordinated and conditioned enough to begin a real routine without injuring themselves. a "real routine" meaning something with adequate volume and exercise variation.
>>
>>51159955
>You start SS with a fucking empty bar, you dont hit an *actual* PR for several weeks into the program, by which time you'll have learned how to squat semi-decently.
rippetoe himself has stated in starting strength that lifting with light weights and lifting with heavy weights are two distinct motor patterns.
>My dad is 61 and managed this with minimal assistance, if a young man or teen cant then they are a GDE and should take up rock collecting or videogames.
that's great for him, but many others have found injuries on SS and actual muscle gains elsewhere.
>>
>>51159966
very hand waivey. So the novice trainee is supposed to go "learn they body" under a set of unspecified criteria where their goal is become coordinated. Make it more vague, this way when it's criticized you can just say it's not quite like that. Cool. When people are learning a skill, precise instruction and guidance is generally preferred.
>>
>>51159993
He's normally discussing the differences in system physics as the load increases. Yes the load increases over time. This doesn't negate that guy's statement, literally at all.
>>
>>51153942
>aesthetics with novice bitch weight
Such a stupid thing to try and profit from. Just trying to ring in the "abs day" faggots into buying their shit. No you don't have to get 8000 calories a day

>>51154237
>>51155098
See
>>51155143
You didn't read the book. You don't even lift.
>>
File: ss.jpg (116 KB, 1920x1080)
116 KB
116 KB JPG
How do I get this look, SS or not?
>>
>>51160137
“Heavy manual labor” is what you’re going for, and SS is probably as close as you’ll get without actually swinging a pick for 12 hours a day.
>>
>>51160045
> So the novice trainee is supposed to go "learn they body" under a set of unspecified criteria where their goal is become coordinated.
they become coordinated by doing a variety of different exercises at light weights with high enough volume to facilitate motor learning.
the amount of weight is specified by the coach.
furthermore "sports" is literally part of the program. just "doing exercise" is going to get a rank novice more coordinated and conditioned.
it's called general physical preparation because it can be accomplished through a variety of means.

>When people are learning a skill, precise instruction and guidance is generally preferred.
the sheiko novice routine is typically done under the guidance of a trainer.
it's nice that starting strength is something anyone can read and try to do on their own, but when people who don't have the right hip socket for conventional deadlifts make themselves do the lift anyway, it inevitably ends in injury. (in itself the trap bar has been proven to be superior in every regard, except for the fact that it's a new invention, and rip likes old things.)
nor does everyone have the shoulder socket to get themselves into a low bar squat position. therein lies the problem with dogmatism: evolution did not specifically select for all humans to be able to perform the "big 3" lifts.
>>
>>51160068
different physics = different motor pattern. go practice lifting tons of repetitions with an empty barbell and see if your form with 315lbs gets better.
rippetoe's advice has you using very light weights for a few months before you move into the linear progression, in which you work your way up to heavy weights which you have had little exposure to as fast as possible.
>>
>>51160137
SS + a glass of vodka every hour for 4 hours.

God I love this show.
>>
>>51160243
different physics = different motor pattern. go practice lifting tons of repetitions with an empty barbell and see if your form with 315lbs gets better.
When you squat, do you go straight to your working weight? At this point in my career I've done literally thousand of empty bar reps. All of them have been worth it.

>rippetoe's advice has you using very light weights for a few months before you move into the linear progression
What does this mean? Your first session weight is 1 working set where the bar seems to slow down (which looks at around RPE8)
You then proceed to do 2, then 3 sets on the following workouts. Afterwards you add 5lbs a session for the duration of the LP, which is normally between 8-12 weeks without resets. Are you implying that there is some pre LP period, or are you talking about the beginning, where you aren't squatting "heavy weight". How are you supposed to gain exposure to heavy weights without lifting them? You slowly grade in weight on the bar throughout the LP. it's literally the point.
>>
>>51160325
>When you squat, do you go straight to your working weight? At this point in my career I've done literally thousand of empty bar reps. All of them have been worth it.
the purpose of squatting with an empty barbell first is just to warm up your muscles & soft tissues
I usually warmup with a little weight on the bar since I see getting reps in with an empty barbell as useless and even counterproductive.
If you look at guys who deadlift 700lbs, many of them warm up with 225lbs because 135 does nothing for them.

>What does this mean? Your first session weight is 1 working set where the bar seems to slow down (which looks at around RPE8)
You then proceed to do 2, then 3 sets on the following workouts. Afterwards you add 5lbs a session for the duration of the LP, which is normally between 8-12 weeks without resets. Are you implying that there is some pre LP period, or are you talking about the beginning, where you aren't squatting "heavy weight".
Nvm, I think I was mixing it up with Candito's LP. Honestly it just sounds even more retarded that Rip expects you to learn while you're adding weight to the bar every week with low volume.

>How are you supposed to gain exposure to heavy weights without lifting them? You slowly grade in weight on the bar throughout the LP. it's literally the point.
What I am implying is that you don't follow a linear progression, since it doesn't allow you to get much form practice.
Better is something like the Juggernaut method or 531 where you use similar percentages week to week, but vary the reps/sets. Then you get plenty of form practice with heavier weights, without pushing yourself to lift a weight PR 3 days a week.
>>
>>51153942
It’s a troll routine and you get the results you deserve if you fall for it.
>>
Monday: Chest/Biceps
4 sets of Incline Dumbbell Press, 8-10 reps
3 sets of Bench Press, 8-10 reps
3 sets of Incline Flies, 8-10 reps
3 sets of Chest Dips until failure
3 sets of Barbell Curls, 8-10 reps
3 sets of Preacher Curls, 8-10 reps, then drop the weight to half, and push out another 8
Tuesday: Legs/Calves
4 sets of Squats 8-10 reps
3 sets of Lunges 8-10 reps
3 sets of Leg Press 8-10 reps
3 sets of Leg Extensions till failure
3 sets of Leg Curls 8-10 reps

Wednesday: Back
3 sets of Lat Pulldowns 8-10 reps
4 sets of Deadlifts 8-10 reps
3 sets of Bent Over Rows 8-10 reps
3 sets of Dumbell Rows 8-10 reps
3 sets of Hyperextensions 8-10 reps
Thursday: Shoulders/Triceps
4 sets of Shoulder Press, alternate with Barbell & Dumbell every week 8-10 reps
3 sets of Upright Rows supersetted with Lateral Raises 8-10 reps
3 sets of front raises 8-10 reps
3 sets of Lying Rear Delt Raises 8-10 reps
3 sets of Close-Grip Bench Press 8-10 reps
4 sets of Pulldowns 8-10 reps
3 sets of Skullcrushers 8-10 reps
Saturday: Full Body
3 sets of Deadlifts 8-10 reps
3 sets of Squats 8-10 reps
3 sets of Clean and Jerk 8-10 reps
3 sets of Weighted Pull ups 8-10 reps
>>
>>51160642
Sunday: bullet lol.

just made that up haha
>>
>>51154595
>>51154472

just do literally anything to get started except listen to this fucking genius.>>51154640


SS is a beginner program. It's meant to get you started and keep you from hurting yourself or burning out due to the tsunami of nonsense in the lifting world.

Just get in the gym and work. You can figure it out later.
>>
>>51154128
post body
>>
>>51153942
Everyday a beginner to the gym will ask what program he should do. /fit/ will usually respond with either Starting Strength or Stronglifts and order them to eat a lot.

A few months will pass and the beginner have stalled and is confused with why he’s not gaining any muscle despite putting so much weight on the bar.
They say he should stick with the program, get a lot of sleep and eat even more food faggot and not to switch programs unless he’s reached “intermediate” lifts or 1/2/3/4.

The beginner sticks with it and runs it for even 1 year, while making very little progress.

Here is where the problem actually lays: Starting Strength and Stronglifts does not actually build muscle, but PEAKS it. In other words, It builds what is already there. Yes! Really!

Both of these programs are based(ripoff) on Bill Starr’s 5×5 that was made for off-season football players that wanted to get their numbers back up in the weight room with as little work as possible.

That is also the case as a beginner. With these programs you’re not actually getting stronger, just adapting to the training, becoming more efficient at moving the bar and getting the central nervous system to handle the work load.
>>
>>51155366
>Funny how this bitter faggot makes all these long winded articles of bullshit spewing but he has never and will never post body.

truly an honorary /fit/izen
>>
>>51155709
>I ran it for 5 months and am fine. Goddamn dyels fuck off.

post body with timestamp or fuck off
>>
>>51155510
>he's laughable
but why? Your post is so uninformative and lazy. Why listen to you under any circumstance?
>>
>>51161788
>Both of these programs are based (ripoff) on Bill Starr’s 5×5
You haven't read Starting Strength or The Strongest Shall Survive clearly, because Bill Starr's programming is an HLM model conpared to Rip's linear progression, with different exercise selection and form (Starr spends a handful of pages on form, while Rip spends as long on the squat as Starr does on his whole exercise section -- in comparison, Starr has far more nutrition/rehabilitation advice)
SL, while claiming to be "inspired" by Bill Starr and Reg Park, is really ripping off Starting Strength except with 5x5 and no power cleans (and very little reasoning for replacing them with rows)
>>
>>51162091
shut up dyel
>>
>>51153942
you son of a dumb bitch.
good luck getting big benching 1 pl8 in 3 years.
>>
>>51161788
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about

>Yes! Really
Fuck off back to plebbit
>>
>>51153942
It’s called Starting “Strength” for a reason.
>>
>>51162361
point proven
>>
File: 1541481144507.jpg (28 KB, 453x563)
28 KB
28 KB JPG
>>51158679
>>
>a 3 month program is a complete scam
>assuming your skin and bones starting...
>get your squat from 45 lbs to 225
>get your bench up to 135

I'm sorry all of you were told to do SS when you were already a fat American, but SS is not a scam.

Idiots.
>>
He’s a literal cuck. Of course his program sucks more dick than his wife
>>
File: ripped.png (106 KB, 318x298)
106 KB
106 KB PNG
>>51159896
f-fine
>>
>>51163413
im not reading this entire thread but last reply checks out

SS is not a scam. It worked great for me, both in strength and aesthetics. My arms grew A LOT just from OHP/bench/rows/pullups/dips. Can't imagine the curlbro-looking disgrace I would have become if I had done any more arm work on top of it.
>>
File: Phraks-Greyskull-LP.jpg (151 KB, 800x689)
151 KB
151 KB JPG
>>51153942
Probably posted ten times but SS is already fixed by professionals.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.