My Train

Please understand that I am not saying Rippetoe's stuff is bad in any way. I have both of Ripptoes's books, read them thoroughly, and trained that way for quite a while. But it's not HST! Simply said, the goal of HST is to expose muscles to tension until they become too conditioned, and growth slows, then SD to reduce the conditioning for more exposure to tension. HST doesn't require a set level of prerequisite strength in order to work; the only requirement is that the muscles must be responsive to the tension. Newbies easily meet this requirement.

Personally, I agree with Quad; but again, I'm not bashing the Bill Star/Rippetoe approach.

As for these newbs losing size and strength during the SD, I submit that there are likely other factors involved. Even Rippetoe has to deal with newbs who claim to eat right, but actually don't. But that's just one factor. What about training volume? Did they take on too many exercises, do too many sets, concentrate on too many isolation exercises? And what about non-gym stressors? All these things have an impact on whether or not gains come along. With HST, we must train ourselves. If we screw things up, does that mean the HST principles are wrong? No. There are planty of former newbs who did quite well with HST, too.

Okay, so how did these unhappy newbs determine that their strength dropped? Was it because the 15s were hard again? Well, after the SD the 15s should be hard again--that's a good sign that the muscles are deconditioned and ready for more exposure to tension.

With SS, there is no SD because exposure to tension is not the guage of success with SS; strength is. And when strength plateaus, the weights are reduced and the lifter works back up again in hopes of pushing past the plateau. This technique has to do with neural stimulus, hormone responses, and the fitness vs. fatigue relationship. So, SS seeks only to put strength on the lifter, while size is a byproduct of food intake. Am I saying this is bad? Not at all. But it's not HST, either. What I am saying, though, is that HST and SS are not directly mixable, and which one a newb is free to choose depends on the newb's long term goals.
 
Ok, neither of us is bashing either method. We are just debating who the audiance is. Correct?

HST:
-SD works well for seasoned lifters who have truly plateued
-SD is therefore unnecessary for beginners who have more potential to progress
-With SD there is a risk due to the absence of stimulus and the tendency for the person to not eat enough food, to cause said person to regress in training
-I have been doing 5s right now where I can objectively say that my strength has slightly regressed
-This I believe is due to an extended period of using submaximal weights 15s 10s
-I had succesfully deconditioned becuase the 15s did feel hard
-Strength is a foundation. If you're not strong you'll never be 'big'. A beginner must focus on foundations such as strength.

HST was designed for people with experience who want to focus more on size than strength & I'm not the only one to say this. SS was specifically designed with beginners in mind thats why I reccommend it to any newb including the topic starter.
 
True, that could be why each method has the word 'specific' in it's title...
rock.gif
 
<div>
(wannagrow @ May 19 2008,1:28)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Ok, neither of us is bashing either method. We are just debating who the audiance is. Correct?

HST:
-SD works well for seasoned lifters who have truly plateued
-SD is therefore unnecessary for beginners who have more potential to progress
-With SD there is a risk due to the absence of stimulus and the tendency for the person to not eat enough food, to cause said person to regress in training
-I have been doing 5s right now where I can objectively say that my strength has slightly regressed
-This I believe is due to an extended period of using submaximal weights 15s 10s
-I had succesfully deconditioned becuase the 15s did feel hard
-Strength is a foundation. If you're not strong you'll never be 'big'. A beginner must focus on foundations such as strength.

HST was designed for people with experience who want to focus more on size than strength &amp; I'm not the only one to say this. SS was specifically designed with beginners in mind thats why I reccommend it to any newb including the topic starter.</div>
Please find my responses to each statement as follows:

-SD works well for seasoned lifters who have truly plateued
This statement presumes that the SD is only needed once &quot;strength&quot; plateaus. This is not true; as Bryan points out, a muscle can become sufficiently conditioned to a particular load within two weeks. Once this happens, the muscle will no longer grow as quickly, whether strength goes up or not. Strategic Deconditioning is utilized only to reduce the conditioning that prevents muscle &quot;growth.&quot; I fully believe it is possible for a newb to work through HST all the way up to the 5s, and have size gains plateau long before the strength gains do. This phenomenon is what causes many newbs (that want size) to start shifting from one program to another in search of size gains. SD enables everyone to grow again while working within their current strength ability.

-SD is therefore unnecessary for beginners who have more potential to progress
This statement assumes the previous statement is true. The word &quot;progress&quot; as used here refers to strength development. SD is not used to break strength plateaus in HST. SD is not used in SS to break strength plateaus, either. Instead, the weights are backed off for a few weeks while the trainee works back up again in hopes of busting through the plateau.

-With SD there is a risk due to the absence of stimulus and the tendency for the person to not eat enough food, to cause said person to regress in training.
This depends on the trainee's goals. A trainee failing to eat correctly has nothing to do with whether or not HST is a good option. Trainees that fail to eat on SS also can lose size (and even then, their strength can still increase). The expression, &quot;regress in training,&quot; as used here refers to strength regression. There are many factors that can contribute to a drop in strength, none of which suggesting that the HST principles are wrong. But these principles may not be optimally applied. Stress is cumulative--training is only one stressor. What about lifestyle factors? What about work stress? Diet? Medical conditions? Psychological conditions, like clinical depression? Amount of sleep at night? Quality of sleep? These are all factors, too...

-I have been doing 5s right now where I can objectively say that my strength has slightly regressed.
Well, I'm sorry to hear this; I know it's disappointing when this happens. In addition to the factors above, though, what about training volume? A bit too much? I know nobody like to admit this one, but ask yourself anyways. From my experience, my tolerance to volume changes like atmospheric pressure ... Volume is, I think, strong correlated with strength gains, too. As per the HST FAQ:

&quot;Decrease volume if:
You are experiencing over use pain, and strain symptoms in joints and/or muscles.
You are tired and irritable all the time, yet don’t sleep well.
Strength levels are significantly decreasing.&quot;

-This I believe is due to an extended period of using submaximal weights 15s 10s.
Would you consider yourself new to lifting? Many newbs find 15s and 10s to be effective--many other programs utilize such weights, as well. How much training volume were you using during the 15s and 10s. One type of newbie mistake is to pile on loads of volume during the 15s and 10s for fear that since the weights are lighter they won't be effective. All this does is cause burn-out and/or strength plateaus by the time the heavy 5s are reached. I don't know whether or not you're doing this, but I think it's a good question to ask yourself.

-I had succesfully deconditioned becuase the 15s did feel hard.
Cool deal, then! You were off to a good start, but then something went a bit off meanwhile. Yes?

-Strength is a foundation. If you're not strong you'll never be 'big'. A beginner must focus on foundations such as strength.
Okay, fair enough. But I don't think this means a beginner cannot use HST effectively, either. HST builds strength, too.

HST was designed for people with experience who want to focus more on size than strength &amp; I'm not the only one to say this. SS was specifically designed with beginners in mind thats why I reccommend it to any newb including the topic starter.

I disagree; HST was designed with all types of trainees in mind--Bryan has made this pretty clear in the HST FAQ. As for recommending SS to any newb you encounter, I think you should consider more than just the fact that they are newbs. Just my opinion, here...
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">This statement presumes that the SD is only needed once &quot;strength&quot; plateaus. This is not true; as Bryan points out, a muscle can become sufficiently conditioned to a particular load within two weeks. Once this happens, the muscle will no longer grow as quickly, whether strength goes up or not. Strategic Deconditioning is utilized only to reduce the conditioning that prevents muscle &quot;growth.&quot; I fully believe it is possible for a newb to work through HST all the way up to the 5s, and have size gains plateau long before the strength gains do. This phenomenon is what causes many newbs (that want size) to start shifting from one program to another in search of size gains. SD enables everyone to grow again while working within their current strength ability.

-SD is therefore unnecessary for beginners who have more potential to progress
This statement assumes the previous statement is true. The word &quot;progress&quot; as used here refers to strength development. SD is not used to break strength plateaus in HST. SD is not used in SS to break strength plateaus, either. Instead, the weights are backed off for a few weeks while the trainee works back up again in hopes of busting through the plateau.</div>

I guess we just view progress differently. At the moment, I'm looking to get stronger and size secondary. Whereas other people might want differnet things. Fair Enough. However for newbs (myself included), the setup of SSBBT is much better because beginners need a few (maximum 4 exercises) to focus on and hone their technique by doing 3 sets. HST is rather complicated with the set/rep schemes changing every fortnight and then the final week of negatives or whatever. Newbs shouldn't be bombarded with complex programming until it is absolutely necessary, as you know and simple linear progression in strength should be the focus even at the expense of potential size gains. Thats my opinion anyway.

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Well, I'm sorry to hear this; I know it's disappointing when this happens. In addition to the factors above, though, what about training volume? A bit too much? I know nobody like to admit this one, but ask yourself anyways. From my experience, my tolerance to volume changes like atmospheric pressure ... Volume is, I think, strong correlated with strength gains, too. As per the HST FAQ: </div>

I was doing something like 9-18 sets per workout and 5/6 of my workouts I didn't go to failure per HST.
Maybe that was excessive volume, I don't know. But I do know that now that I've simplified to 3 exercises per workout 3 sets each, my volume is well under control maybe even on the low side.

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">This depends on the trainee's goals. A trainee failing to eat correctly has nothing to do with whether or not HST is a good option. Trainees that fail to eat on SS also can lose size (and even then, their strength can still increase). The expression, &quot;regress in training,&quot; as used here refers to strength regression. There are many factors that can contribute to a drop in strength, none of which suggesting that the HST principles are wrong. But these principles may not be optimally applied. Stress is cumulative--training is only one stressor. What about lifestyle factors? What about work stress? Diet? Medical conditions? Psychological conditions, like clinical depression? Amount of sleep at night? Quality of sleep? These are all factors, too...</div>

What I'm saying is that if you had to choose a programme for a new guy, its preferable to prescribe SS. With HST he would SD and there would be an increased likelihood for him to lose size, strength because ,by their nature, newbs underestimate their dietary requirements. With SS, even if he neglects the dietary aspect, he will still make progress in strength, due to no SDing and constant training (even if its a deload). With HST he risks losing out in both size and strength. I'm not saying he will definitely lose out or that even if he does its not his responsibility, I'm just talking here about probability not certainty.

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">
I disagree; HST was designed with all types of trainees in mind--Bryan has made this pretty clear in the HST FAQ. As for recommending SS to any newb you encounter, I think you should consider more than just the fact that they are newbs. Just my opinion, here... </div>

Ofcourse a beginner can use HST but what will he benefit from more in the long run? I think its a simple programme which emphasises linear progression in strength while the newbie gains last. HST is complicated, lets not deny that and the majority of novices would fare better on a simpler programme. By the way, when I say HST, I'm referring to the standard Vanilla version.

If someone's training age is under 1-2 years, is healthy, no injuries, no other problems I think hes a prime candidate for SS.
 
While I agree strongly with WG on the aspect of diet, it's one of those things that people just have to learn. Eating actually IS hard for some, and that was a good point about doing too much in the early 15's due to light weights. (I do two sets myself, but I need to)
I stand on my statements about injury; it's way too many posts I've read from noobs who tore their achilles, forearms, or other things from gaining strength without conditioning. Now, keep in mind my description here of noobs. The guys I'm talking about are the ones in the first 6-8 months of training.
Newbie (n.) (noob) Individual aspiring to a particular sport or vocation requiring training and practice of said vocation in order to excel amongst peers. Most often requiring a period of up to one year to accumulate required experience and ability, many exceptional individuals aspire to periods of even up to five years or indefinitely, prioritizing ignorance and still doing stupid crap. ~adv.- newly, recently
 
I agree, Quad. Not to mention that always working in the heavy 5s neglects developing muscle endurance, or strengthening tension and joints.

Truth be told, before I learned about HST or SS, I always heard that newbs should start off with 1-2 sets per bodypart, for 12-15 reps, 3 times per week. Later, after some conditioning was developed, the weights would be increased and the reps dropped to 8-12.
 
Like I said friend, your program is good. Add exercises for the abdominals and do barbell curls instead of hammer curls. If you get bored with this there are many other programs to enjoy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top