Push Pull Squat Critique

Hi All,

I recently read the following article and wondered what your guys thoughts were on this kind of set up?

Pull Press Squat

I like the fact that it includes a lot of variaty, a high frequency for each of the movement types. I also like the fact that, by virtue of it's emphasis on lower rep ranges, it is very strength focused.

I am not sure I could handle that amount of workload but I guess the only way to find out would be to try it. Just in case the link goes down here is an example month from the article:

Sample Month:

Week 1

Monday
90% – 5×1, safety bar squat
80% – 5×2, push press
70% – 5×3, hang snatch

Wednesday
90% – 5×1, barbell incline
80% – 5×2, high pull
70% – 5×3, front squat

Friday
90% – 5×1, bent row
80% – 5×2, low box squat
70% – 5×3 behind neck jerk

Week 2

Monday
70% – 5×3, safety bar squat
90 – 5×1, push-press
80 – 5×2, hang snatch

Wednesday
80% – 5×2, barbell incline
70% – 5×3, high pull
90% – 5×1, front squat

Friday
90% – 5×1, bent row
80% – 5×2, low box squat
70% – 5×3 behind neck jerk

Week 3

Monday
80% – 5×2, safety bar squat
70% – 5×3, push-press
90% – 5×1, hang snatch

Wednesday
90% – 5×1, barbell incline
80% – 5×2, high pull
70% – 5×3, front squat

Friday
70% – 5×3, bent row
90% – 5×1, low box squat
80% – 5×2 behind neck jerk

Week 4

Monday
Test: safety bar squat
Pull accessory
Press accessory

Wednesday

Test: barbell incline
Pull accessory
Squat accessory

Friday
Test: bent row
Press accessory
Squat accessory

Any thoughts?

Cheers,

Leather.

ERIC:

Look at the language in the first paragraph and then look at the last paragraph. Compare the two.

Ask yourself if the reasons given for "why" to do it have anything to do with you or strength training in general.

Here are some other questions:

1. Hard work equals success? I find doing yard work "hard work". Doesn't help my squat or deadlift. As a "formula" then that's pretty damned week

2. Being aggressive is important for success. Again, what does that mean. Notice the use of relative terms in need of qualification. Ask yourself what this has to do with "thinking" about your own strength training.

And remember that NOBODY EVER thinks they are not working hard!

Now evaluate the premises behind the routine.

Since that all seems to be more about general attitudes than about how any one person should go about getting strong, despite the presence of a template, I think this is a good accompaniement: Why Fitness, Diet, Bodybuilding, and Strength Training Programs Work

LEATHER:

Hi Eric,

Thanks for your response.

I agree that the rhetoric around the routine is annoying and of course I don't think productive strength training is anything near as simple as hard work = success.

I also agree that most of the points need qualification, for example what exactly is hard work? What constitutes agression in this context? If the percentages, reps and sets are all laid out but I don't do them with a big frown on my face am I being agressive enough?

Having said all of that… if we ignore all of the "fluff" around the routine how does the core template look to you?

If I ignore the authors reasoning and look at the routine in isolation I see the following points:

1) It provides a relatively high frequency of training for each body part/movement (higher than my current template).

2) It provides a fairly wide variaty of exercises in a given mesocycle. From reading some of your articles I understand that you generally favour using several movements rather than just limiting yourself to one or two. It also allows exercises to be switched after every mesocycle allowing for further variaty if needed.

3) The training work is concentrated at the lower rep range which I understand to be more suited to strength specific work.

4) The template attempts to manage intensity to a certain extent. I am not sure how effective this would be and it would obviously vary between individuals.

I am obviously a complete novice when it comes to evaluating things like this. Would you be able to talk me through how you would go about evaluating this routine if a client came to you suggesting it?

ERIC:

I agree that the rhetoric around the routine is annoying and of course I don't think productive strength training is anything near as simple as hard work = success.

I also agree that most of the points need qualification, for example what exactly is hard work? What constitutes agression in this context? If the percentages, reps and sets are all laid out but I don't do them with a big frown on my face am I being agressive enough?

Having said all of that… if we ignore all of the "fluff" around the routine how does the core template look to you?

Well, the point of those questions I asked weren't just to say "look at all the fluff" as if that in itself "proves" something. The point was to get you to figure out if there was any real explanation of the why's and wherefore's.

Now you pointed out the "whats" in your response and began to hit on the why's so I'll try to respond to each point:

1) It provides a relatively high frequency of training for each body part/movement (higher than my current template).

So look at the frequency x the flexibility. And think of your goals…not the goals of the guy who wrote the article. This is why I specifically wanted you to focus on the first paragraph. It tells you everything about the motivation of the article.

This is a "full body" routine. Full body routines are great to visit but you don't want to live there. That doesn't mean this in itself wouldn't be ok to do unless it was just too much too soon for you

2) It provides a fairly wide variety of exercises in a given mesocycle. From reading some of your articles I understand that you generally favour using several movements rather than just limiting yourself to one or two. It also allows exercises to be switched after every mesocycle allowing for further variety if needed.

Actually that is not true. Strongman training cannot limit itself to a few "movements" but that doesn't really have much to do with how the population at large can train. I actually favor "prioritizing" a few lifts at any one time and dong a large variety of "exercises" to support that in various ways.

I can't compare what I favor to this routine because of one very important thing..it's percentage based. If there is one thing I repeat over and over again it is that I HATE PERCENTAGE BASED ROUTINES 

3) The training work is concentrated at the lower rep range which I understand to be more suited to strength specific work.

Tends toward lower rep is good. "Concentrates on lower reps" is not very sensible. Again, everything is focused on percentages as if there is some kind of magic in that. So ask yourself, "self, why would I train my squat (or safety bar squat), my incline bench press, AND my rows, EXACTLY the same". Why? I cannot think of one good reason. What does a row have to do with a squat. How could they possibly benefit from the same exact parameters?

4) The template attempts to manage intensity to a certain extent. I am not sure how effective this would be and it would obviously vary between individuals.

Covered my feeling on that. At any given time "percentage" is meaningless for any individual because it is based on a number that at any given time is meaningless for any individual. 

Percentage is simply a reflection of some kind of maximal ability. But maximal ability is continually in flux..and to a much greater degree than most trainees tend to realize. By the time you get to the end of these types of routines you could have been spending a lot of your time training at a much lower "relative intensity" than you thought or a much higher one.

Honestly though, when it comes to talking you through it, my opinion is very simple. I do not think percentage based routines are effective for a wide range of trainees.

But the fluff…it is important. It really does tell you what you need to know. You just have to be able to see it. I mean, right off the bat, look at what you asked me about the ignoring the rhetoric. That is the big problem right there with all the routines floating around! Everybody focuses on how the routine looks on paper and wants to ignore the rhetoric. But the rhetoric is replacing any actual explanation. You mentioned my articles…do you see rhetoric or do you see explanation? Not to toot my horn but to make a point…the explanation is more important than the routine. You don't learn from routines. I know that people think you do but you don't because "doing a routine" does not set up a learning in environment. Yet, we have been taught to except and expect this while being given meaningless rhetoric! So don't dismiss it is just "a fact of life" and move on to the routine. If there was why's and wherefore's to be had they would have been given.

LEATHER:

Well, the point of those questions I asked weren't just to say "look at all the fluff" as if that in itself "proves" something. The point was to get you to figure out if there was any real explanation of the why's and wherefore's.

OK, I think I understand you here but what I was trying to say is that irrespective of the authors reasoning (or lack thereof) for this routine I was trying to look at it from the perspective of how useful it might be for me. To put it another way.. if you were to say to me that you wanted me to use this template I would look at it and ask myself why and then probably come up with the points I listed before. The reasons may differ completely from those of the author, but they may still be there.

I actually favor "prioritizing" a few lifts at any one time and dong a large variety of "exercises" to support that in various ways.

Good point - I obviously misunderstood you before. I stand corrected. 

I do not think percentage based routines are effective for a wide range of trainees.

I can see your point on this and I understand that the persons max is in a constant state of flux but I think this comes back to something we have discussed before and that I have failed to grasp… if you don't use percentage's then how do you go about regulating the intensity?
So percentages have flaws but they do provide a simple way of giving someone a rough idea of how close to their believed max at a given time. Would you mind giving me a pointer as to how you go about doing this please?

But the fluff…it is important. It really does tell you what you need to know. You just have to be able to see it. I mean, right off the bat, look at what you asked me about the ignoring the rhetoric. That is the big problem right there with all the routines floating around! Everybody focuses on how the routine looks on paper and wants to ignore the rhetoric. But the rhetoric is replacing any actual explanation. You mentioned my articles…do you see rhetoric or do you see explanation? Not to toot my horn but to make a point…the explanation is more important than the routine. You don't learn from routines. I know that people think you do but you don't because "doing a routine" does not set up a learning in environment. Yet, we have been taught to except and expect this while being given meaningless rhetoric! So don't dismiss it is just "a fact of life" and move on to the routine. If there was why's and wherefore's to be had they would have been given.

Again, great point. As stated above I was looking at the routine in spite of it's lack of explanation when I really should have been asking… why doesn't the author give the reasoning behind this? I mean he does start to by stating:

My training partners and I knew that all strongman contest events involved some kind of pressing, some kind of pulling, and lots of leg strength.

But the rest of the introduction doesn't seem to detail the end goal, but rather things like:

We also liked to train at a higher volume and wanted to squat, pull, and press more than just once a week.

OK - but just because you like it has nothing to do with the goal.. right?

JOE:

I can see your point on this and I understand that the persons max is in a constant state of flux but I think this comes back to something we have discussed before and that I have failed to grasp… if you don't use percentage's then how do you go about regulating the intensity?
So percentages have flaws but they do provide a simple way of giving someone a rough idea of how close to their believed max at a given time. Would you mind giving me a pointer as to how you go about doing this please?

In the singles scene article we regulated volume more than anything. Intensity was only regulated by 90% of the relative max, and even then it is a bit loose (does 89 count?).

The only real way to tell if you're near your max (aside from experience and how the weight 'feels') is to find your relative max for that day. This will be confusing so bare with me lol. 80% of your relative max from wednesday might not be 80% of your relative max on the day you say you're doing 80% of your relative max.

What you've listed seems to yo-yo a bit also. Some movements go triples, to singles, to doubles. I'd prefer going from 1 to 3 or 3 to 1.

I would handle this by first erasing the percentages (I would actually scrap the whole thing and start fresh but let's go with it for right now). Week 1 you hit a relative max for the respective rep range your using (so whatever weight you can handle for a triple is your relative max. I'm getting a bit loose with the term relative max now btw). Week 2 you try and work as close to, or higher than, that weight. Just forget the % of last week compared to this week and keep the loose rationale that a triple is lighter than a double is lighter than a single. Even that is not a hard and fast rule because you may lift more for a triple in week 3 than you do with a single in week 1 or a double in week 2. But in general that is how it goes.

One of the things that irks me with % based training is sticking to a weight. What if I lift 90lbs for a single in week 1 (lets assume I tested a week before and 100 was my max, so this is 90%) but in week 2 I am able to lift 90lbs (or even more maybe) for a double, why should I sacrifice intensity and lift 80lbs (80%). And maybe in week 3 I can handle 80 for triple, why would I lift 70? The argument back would probably be that my first single was low (off day or whatever), but I would argue that you have no way of distinguishing a 'good max' from a 'poor max' and that it just doesn't make sense to program a month of training based on a single static number. You could also flip this on its head and say you had a very good max and now you can't hit the 90%, 80%, or 70% in the following weeks. Are you supposed to give up the first time you can't make the % or are you supposed to employ the scared cat deadlifting technique?

LEATHER:

Hi Joe,

Thanks for your response. I think you have hit on the key thing that is puzzling me about the idea doing away with percentages when you say this:

What if I lift 90lbs for a single in week 1 (lets assume I tested a week before and 100 was my max, so this is 90%) but in week 2 I am able to lift 90lbs (or even more maybe) for a double, why should I sacrifice intensity and lift 80lbs (80%). And maybe in week 3 I can handle 80 for triple, why would I lift 70?

My question here is that you seem to be saying that you always max out with a given weight… This is what is confusing me because I thought, perhaps incorrectly, that there was some value in doing sub-maximal work. Following on from your example lets say in week 3 I can handle 80 for a triple does that always mean I should? Is there no value at all in doing work at less than the maximum number of reps I can achieve on a given day?

I thought that it was fairly common to work at reps lower than the maximum possible in order to add volume without maxing out constantly.

Am I missing something here?

JOE:

There is value in submaximal work. If you're learning a movement submaximal sets of 3 (or less) can be great. But if you have triples in your workout they are typically high intensity (high intensity for a triple anyway).

Following on from your example lets say in week 3 I can handle 80 for a triple does that always mean I should?

If they are there for the purposes of strength training, then you should be doing as much weight as you can safely and comfortably handle. Even in a deload situation the intensity is kept high, volume is dropped.

Is there no value at all in doing work at less than the maximum number of reps I can achieve on a given day?

Just to make it clear, maximum number of reps is the amount of reps you can safely and comfortably do (this includes correct form). You're not necessarily working to failure either, but I'd say you're walking the line quite a bit.

I thought that it was fairly common to work at reps lower than the maximum possible in order to add volume without maxing out constantly.

If you're referring to what is usually called "leaving a couple reps in the tank", or working to near failure, then it is generally a good idea to stop a couple reps shy of failure…..if you're talking about accessory movements (again not a hard and fast rule). When it comes to singles, doubles or triples I intend to get that number of reps, no more, and sometimes less.

Triples, doubles and singles I would throw into the maximal work category. Accessory work and whatnot generally falls into the sub-maximal category. Again, if your goal is strength why would you sacrifice the #1 priority, intensity.

LEATHER:

Thanks again for the response Joe.

But if you have triples in your workout they are typically high intensity (high intensity for a triple anyway).

Just to clarify I am referering to core movements here, not accessory work

If you were laying out a template for someone that included triples how would you guide them on what kind of weight to use, or would that be up to them to always do close to the maximum poundage they could handle for a triple on that day?

Along these lines why do they have to be triples? Or to put it another way lets say I can do 100kg for a triple and I decide to do 2 sets of triples.. is there any advantage to that over say 6 singles, or 3 doubles? You say intensity is the number one priority for strength which makes sense but I am not sure if the way that intensity is spread matters. Does it make any difference if I do 6 reps with 80kg in 3,2 or 6 sets?

If not then why do you have to go to maximal reps? I can see the difficulty with percentages but I also think that saying things like "Leave a couple of reps in the tank" is also open to interpretation.

From what you're saying am I right in that I should always be hitting the maximum number of safe reps I can do for a given exercise on a given day within a template? (that is what I am generally doing at the moment).

JOE:

OK, but if you were laying out a template for someone that included triples how would you guide them on what kind of weight to use, or would that be up to them to always do close to the maximum poundage they could handle for a triple on that day?

Intensity is number 1. If I were dealing with someone brand new to the concept I would suggest that they do quality volume (sets of 3 working up to a 'max' weight) to feel where they were at. Set a baseline. Now you have a rough idea of where you stand and you build on that. There is nothing saying that you can't change the weight throughout a workout btw. If you do 100lbs for 3 reps and its not so bad, increase it to 105 or 110 (maybe more) and do another set. If there is still more room add more weight for the next set. Feel it out. The next time you'll have a better idea of where your weight range is. Maybe you start at 105 and end at 110. It does come down to a bit of experience and experimentation in the gym.

It is absolutely up to the person. I don't know how you perceived the movement, sometimes you don't even know yourself lol. If I were there in person watching I could make suggestion based on what I see (add another 10lbs, take 5lbs off, etc.) but in the end it is up to YOU to determine how much you can safely lift.

Along these lines why do they have to be triples? Or to put it another way lets say I can do 100kg for a triple and I decide to do 2 sets of triples.. is there any advantage to that over say 6 singles, or 3 doubles? You say intensity is the number one priority for strength which makes sense but I am not sure if the way that intensity is spread matters. Does it make any difference if I do 6 reps with 80kg in 3,2 or 6 sets?

There is a huge difference between 100kg for 2 triples vs 100kg for 6 singles. There is so much more workload for the triples, the volume is the same but you cannot discount the density. The whole argument is somewhat flawed because if I can do 100kg for a triple I should theoretically be able to do more for a single (even if it is only 5lbs more). From an absolute strength standpoint you can't beat the intensity of singles. Intensity and density (volume as well) are inversely proportional, as one rises the other lowers.

From what you're saying am I right in that I should always be hitting the maximum number of safe reps I can do for a given exercise on a given day within a template? (that is what I am generally doing at the moment).

If the weight is appropriate yes. You shouldn't set out to do a triple and end up with 5 reps. This doesn't mean you should keep doing triples until you can't anymore, ending up with 10 sets.

In a nutshell, you should use as much weight as you can safely and comfortably use. Afterall, this is strength training. The mission statement is to lift heavy things, not heavyish things.

ERIC:



The kind of thing that always happens to these kinds of discussions is that they become more of a "what is the essence of strength training, grasshopper?" kind of thing rather than a discussion of one distinct aspect of training.


So I'll try to continue this by breaking it down into those distinct aspects.


The first thing that comes to mind is that what we are discussing is regulated variables and how they are regulated. Or, in other words, what things are you meas

uring or keeping track of and what do you do with those measurements?

So, percentage based routines hold intensity as the regulated variable. Right? That is what you are specifically asking about, Leather, how do I regulate intensity. OK, so to sum up what Joe and I are saying and to give a point blank answer, for the majority of trainees, it is volume and density that must be regulated, not intensity.


What Joe is saying is intensity should be kept as high as possible while maintaining quality and safety. Then you, quite rightly, ask whether this makes sense in the context of everything else. The answer is, yes, it makes sense.


Let's keep a few things in mind here. There is the intensity of the core exercise and there is your median intensity. Taking in all the workload and the sub-maximal work your median intensity is going to be kept moderate. This is the problem and is what holds people back. They are paranoid about working at too high a percentage without realizing that it represents a very small part of their overall workload. If you were doing a bunch of plyos and stuff like that you'd take that into consideration but in general the median intensity is very manageable.


From one of the ebooks:

People who are afraid of maximal weights fail to realize just how little of the workload during even a very heavy week uses intensities of 90% or greater. A busy week of singles and doubles, separated for instance between deadlifts and overhead press, would still have only perhaps 5 or 6 percent of the total work being near maximal. And the majority of the remaining work would be movements that are not that similar to the primary movements being prioritized and could be considered cross-training or even conditioning depending on the trainee’s needs.

It makes more sense to keep intensity relatively high, 85% or above while regulating volume, for the most part.

How Intensity is Spread

When asking about how intensity is spread you are misunderstanding intensity a bit. We use percentages of 1RM for a yardstick only and as a simple way of defining the intensity we are using. This does not mean that we go around calculating a number all the time. Don't confuse what we did with the Singles Scene as a modus operandi. The numbers were necessary for that particular method of training.


You asked about the difference between a triple versus the same weight for 6 singles, etc. Let's forget about all the leaving stuff in the tank and whether or not we are training to failure. That just confuses any discussion of intensity because you have to assume that you are working to monentary failure at least.


SO, that means that the weight you can do for only 3 reps in a row, a triple, is your 3RM. Okay? So from one perspective you are working at say, 87 to 90% of your 1RM and from another you are working at 100% of your 3RM. Both are measurements of intensity.


What matters, then, is how they change your way of progressing. What is the difference between using that weight for 3 reps straight as opposed to 6 singles? Not a whole lot over one workout! But what do you do next? How do you build on it?


All complications aside it comes down to this. A percentage based program has you over-reacting to a single static number, as Joe said. It has nothing to do withwhat actually happens. Joe and I are saying that this makes no sense. It's a simple as that.

Blog Posts

I think you've got a good formula going for you blog posts.


A couple of things I'd like you to remember about them (and take a look at the changes I made


1. When you have a video make sure to put "video" in the header above the video plus the exercise name, etc. This way the search engines know there is a video. Since we don't have a fancy player or means of alerting google to the video, google needs to be told. This is very important because when you go to the trouble of putting up a video you won't people to get a result when they search for say, "pinch grip deadlift video". And all it takes is putting video in the header. Since it is in a header (I.E. big @+@ or @++@) google will assign importance to it and assume that it is an important word and that a video is probably present on the page. We get LOTS of traffic this way.


2. Although this seems silly, don't just put "exercise technique" or something before the exercise performance section, put the name of the exercise again..such as what I wrote "how to perform the so and so" or something like that. See the thing is with short blog posts about exercises, it is easy to only have the exercise name in the title and nowhere else! So as always you are writing primarily to people but secondarily to the search engine. And it doesn't know anything. So the title is the most important thing of course to tell the search bot what the page is about but then when some key words from the title are not repeated at all in the article body the search bot doesn't know just how important these words are. In other words..the title could be an abstract title, right? Such as something clever or fancy that doesn't represent what the article is about. When the words are not repeated at all the bot still doesn't know for sure what weight to put on the title. But when you repeat words from the title strategically (not over and over again just strategically) suddenly the bot knows that yes, the tilte is VERY important..this page is about this particular exercise or subject. Bump it up in the search results.
Now I'm not talking about cheating and doing ridiculous things..just little tweaks to help the search bots understand the page.


So look at what I did and sort of apply that kind of thing.


Thanks!

How to Upload Pictures

Well I just though of it really. It pays to host images here when we can because we get loads of traffic from image searches. I mean loads. Now that that's said..

Downloading copyrighted images to flickr and putting them up here or hosting them here is still the same..both illegal. You need to make sure to pick images that are free to re-use. That usually entails a creative commons license and they ask for an attribution. Flickr has a search option for "commons". But the easiest thing to do is to use google images like you usually do except hit advanced search. There is a usage rights option towards the bottom. Hit the free to reuse or share and you should be able to find what you're looking for. If you send me the url's before hand I can verify them for you but like I said I can also put the captions on for you etc…

It's no big deal I'm just trying to take advantage of every possible thing I can.

When you say upload them on GUS you mean via the image wizard, right?

I never use that but you can use that if that's what you've been doing.

Here's the steps. It's easy and straightforward.

1. Save the image to you computer wherever you would normally save images.

2. If the image is huge go ahead a resize it down so we don't take up needless file space or pick a smaller image version if that is an option. Not tiny but for a jpeg I've found 50kb's or under usually covers it. Usually, if you can get it down to about 550 px wide that is better. Although I have lots of storage space it's not unlimited so lots of big image files will add up.

3. A forum thread page is just a page like any other page. So at the very bottom of the forum thread page is a bunch of option buttons. One of them is "files". Hit that and it will prompt you to select a file (you can select multiple files for bulk uploading). Select the image file from your computer, hit open and then hit upload. You'll be familiar with this process. Nothing unusual.

4. Once the file is done uploading hit "refresh file list". Now there will already be a big list of files. Find your file and get the url location by either clicking on it and just copying the url from your browser or by hitting "options" and then "info" to get the url.

5. Plug that url into the image code in your post. That's it. You can force the size of images btw, like this:


That's just an example. You don't need width and height. Best to use just width and it will retain the proportions.

 Once you do one I will put in the caption and the alt attribute. Alt attributes are very important if you want people to be able to find the image.

VERY IMPORTANT:

When you are looking at the options for the forum pages one of the options is "Delete". Whatever you do NEVER EVER use the page delete in the forum or get that mixed up with deleting a post. Deleting a post is absolutely separate from deleting the page. But the page contains the forum module and if the PAGE were deleted the forum would be deleted and we'd never be able to get it back. Period. So don't mess with anything except "Files" at the bottom of the page.

If you did accidently push delete it would give you a warning but just in case I wanted to be sure you understood the difference. This delete is way at the bottom of the page, separate from the post options.

Life Lessons with Eric

You went to the Air Force. There's no way it was easy, right?

Wasn't easy but it was some of the best times I ever had. Plus…I worked 9 to 5 most of the time, lol. Sure sometimes we deployed but even that was fun. I was experiencing things that most people never get to experience. Plus, don't forget one crucial difference. I was government property! Once I signed up I had no choice except for jail. Court martial. A non-choice!

Life is complicated, E….add to that I'm still dealing with breaking up with my gf and surrounding myself with a bunch of idiots who I think I might shake off sometime soon.

Sure, Ash, life is complicated but sometimes we over-complicate it by the choices we make. Life is also short. However, that being said, this time period is one short time period in your life (hopefully) that will just be one stop on the road that takes you where you want to be. The problem is that maybe you're not sure you're on the right road. And nobody hardly ever is.

Kids my age have their whole fucking lives planned out…

Sure they think they do. Except for nine times out of ten those kids hit age 50 and realize how miserable and unhappy they've been and how "stuck" they feel. They feel regret that they've "wasted their lives" doing something that they chose too quickly. I know that you think of a lot of successful and "happy" people who have spent their lives doing the thing they love most but that is just a function of those things that stand out in our memory. It is not typical. Those kids who "have their lives planned out…" have no true advantage over you. What happens when the plan doesn't go according to plan?! Can they adapt? Can they overcome? Screw worrying about about how it is for other people. The grass is never truly greener on the other side.

-----x-----

The other idiots get happy in their 9-5 typical jobs.

You're being judgemental buddy. It's not fair to assume that everybody is "happy in their 9 to 5 jobs" and thus them being happy in something so mundane makes them an idiot. Not everybody looks at it the same way. To some people they may not be thrilled with their job but they may be comfortable and content in their job. They may even find satisfaction in it. But that may not be where they seek happiness. I, for one, am very happy working out in the sun doing something that at the end of the day I can look at it and say "I accomplished something today. I did good work and now I can look on the the results and be proud of it." That does not mean I am fulfilling my passion, necessarily, but that I can see value in it and see the advantages of it. At the same time, I might simply do something that I "like" in a regular every day job, just to be able to spend all my free time doing something I LOVE. So, from that perspective, spending ALL my time in some money-making CAREER as opposed to "just a job" would be the opposite of happy. What you are seeking is BIG TIME CAREER THAT MAKES YOU HAPPY. And that maybe why you are so doubtful.


And look at both things you said in the same pm:


I'm just another yuppie idiot.
The other idiots get happy in their 9-5 typical jobs.


Examine your thought pattern. I don't think any of this has to do with career. I think it has to do something you feel is important. Maybe important in a larger way than just important to you. I could be wrong but if your not "another yuppie idiot" and you're not "an idiot who is happy in his 9-5 job" then what kind of idiot is left? Well, there is the James Cameron style idiot who is so mighty impressed with himself because the things he does are so might damned impressive. And there is the everyday hero who quietly labors to add something to the world. Add to our sum of knowledge. Make the world better in some way. Etc and so on. I know that you want money so you can do those kinds of things. But yet you are not happy seeking a career where…you are not doing those kinds of things! Trap.


Ash, I'm a working class dude. I'm not white-collar and I've never wanted to be white-collar. Sure, I've worked those kinds of jobs here and there. But to me, there are things I love and there are jobs. One thing to never forget…all those people working the 9-5 are the people who make the world liveable for me and you! That guy working 9 to 5 to maintain the sewer system is what stands between you and dysentary or worse, lol, so never think he isn't doing great things!

----x----

Eric why would you think that way about me :-(

I'm not accusing you of anything. I'm trying to say that there is satisfaction in doing something that is valuable. It is a choice how to look at it.

And I dunno why you are grouping all 9-5 jobs as non-white-collar. You do know that Finance jobs are also 9-5, right? Sure Investment Bankers work 24x7 but the rest of them don't. I wasn't talking about 9-5 as some sort of economic differentiation group or something. I meant 9-5 as in that typical 9-5 who only wants that 9-5 and nothing more - this means nothing even on the side (read: no passion whatsoever).

I'm not, lol. However, many of those jobs you are talking about are 9-5 in words only. Is it really 9 to 5 when you take it home with you and spend the night getting ready for the next day's meeting or presentation? And there is the "white-collar" 9 to 5 where you never move up and there is reality…which says if you ONLY word 9 to 5 you go nowhere. But you are relating everything I say to something you said too much. I was telling you about myself.

I meant 9-5 as in that typical 9-5 who only wants that 9-5 and nothing more - this means nothing even on the side (read: no passion whatsoever).

I get that but so what? Not everyone needs BIG things to make them happy. Talking about myself and myself only again, you know my motto is "Don't sweat the small stuff and appreciate the little things"? I don't look for happiness because of what I DO. Talking about myself and myself only. Because looking for happiness in what I do is looking for happy with a capital H. Big happy. Big happy never happens. It's a myth. This is part of what I've been trying to get across. A lot of people, when they say "I'm happy" in a general way, they mean they are satisfied, content, comfortable, secure, etc.


Those people who only want the 9 to 5 and are happy with that, and they don't have some over-riding passion..well they may well be satisfied, content, comfortable, secure, etc. What's the difference between them and a person who is seeking BIG happy? Those people, are happy some of the time and the other guy, searching for Big happy and never finding it is always miserable. Because nobody is happy all the time…except idiots, lol. At the end of the day, life is a lot of little things that are good. Very few big things. All the littlle things and the big thing, if you appreciate them for the moment, as they come, adds up to….happiness.
I'm not trying to give you advice. I'm discussing.

Don't misunderstand me, E. I am not some snobbish elitist and I'm not saying this like those guys who have plead to not being racist coz they have one token black friend.

I don't think anything like that. It really doesn't matter what you say. I don't judge people, Ash. It's not my place to judge people. There is nothing you could say that could shock me because I've seen too many things, thought too many things.


The reason I brought up blue collar jobs was to try to equate that everyday appreciation of the little things we accomplish with a larger sense of happiness. You know, a lot of these people you are talking about, if you think about it, the difference between being happy or not happy in what you do is a function of how jaded you are. I've known guys that do a job for years and years and after a while they just hate it. The bitch and moan and complain and act like they are the only ones who have to deal with the realities of a job. They are jaded and cynical and they just get by and get a paycheck. And then there are other guys who do that same job, and never lose that sense of pride in what they do. They strive for perfection. They run their fingers over the thing they've created. They look on at a job well done and smile to themselves. Then they go home at the end of a 9 to 5 day, have a beer, hang out with their buddies. Enjoy their family. Maybe go fishing on the weekends. And ALL of it's meaningful to them. All of it counts. They live in the moment. That doesn't mean they are idiots and don't plan for the future, but that they don't look over the horizon for happiness. Instead they recognize happiness when it comes and relish it. Live in it. When they laugh the REALLY laugh. And enjoy laughing. When they hug their family and friends hello they really hug them, and never stop reflecting on how lucky they are to have them. Nothing goes unnoticed and unappreciated. Little vexations have no power over this. You can't rock a guy like that. That's the guy you want at your back and that's the guy you want in a crisis. So, a guy like that, what does he need with passion? Nothing is a big deal, everything counts. Do things because you want to do them. Because you see value in them. Don't worry about what it says about you. Your heart won't let you become a man you do not want to be.

Joe's advice on Grip Training

Saturday - DL + Static Holds

Sunday - FSQ, Back work…no grip training

Tuesday - Grip Work first (Grippers) and then the Upper Body work.

Wednesday - Squats + Crosswise Brick Exercise + Plate Pinch Deadlifts

Special note: Hand Extensions done in controlled fashion for 20 reps done for 3 sets post every grip training session.

That's good.

• Walmart Gripper - 2 sets of 5 reps; first set is slow second set is fast no setting allowed
  • • • • HG 150 Gripper - 2 sets of 2 reps; setting for the second set only
        • CoC #1 Gripper - Singles; setting allowed
        • HG 150 Gripper - 1 set of 6-8 reps; setting allowed

Go with that workout for now and see where you're at.

Right now I don't think I am very strong on this. So I was wondering if you'd like me to make any changes or if I should try this out. Let's say I am only able to do 1-2 singles with the CoC #1 (most likely scenario), is it okay if I go do 3 sets of 3-5 reps with the HG 150?

3 sets of 3-5 after the CoC#1? Yeah you could do that but I'd rather you did more singles with the No.1.

More Banded Deadlift Training..

Great job on the banded deadlifts. Awesome when a plan comes together.
I don't know how much you've explained to others about how I teach the bands.
A couple of things.

1. There are no silly calculations here concerning "how much weight at the top". This comes down to having a lot of volume under your belt and a whole lot of work under fatigue. The reason people do calculations and try to pick some predetermined based on a rule they've read is because they can't handle what the bands throw at them. They need to make sure it's not "too" heavy.
Here it doesn't matter. Ashiem did a number one mini band where he just ramped up the weihts to a struggle set. And here on this cycle he went to the red band.

2. The struggle sets. The idea here is to work up to a weight that you cannot lock out. On purpose. And then "struggle". Actually, Ashiem coined the name "struggle set". And that is exactly what it is. This is similar to "working the bottom of the deadlift" where you place the bar underneath something so it stops at about mid shin (the sticking region) and struggle against it.

Here, we do that with bands, starting out with weights we can lock out well and moving on to weights we do a couple of struggle sets with. Here Ash does 225 and then 245. Now, comes the whole purpose. After the 245 he goes back and is able to lock out the 225 which he struggled with before. That is how it is supposed to work. It is a process of facilitation.

Then after that he pulls some heavy ones.

Notice how explosive he is on the early banded sets..

All this serves another purpose. To erase all the nonsense about how you can only do so many deadlifts and how it will ruin your back. You can do what you are conditioned to do. Ashiem could not have done this in the early days. He has trained for it. His training is harder than his max lifts. That is, if we consider his PR days "contest" days, his "regular" training is much harder.
After watching Ashiem do this, BACK TO BACK, with an earlier banded deadlift cycle, complete with struggle sets, what do you think the chances are of him getting injured during a heavy PR attempt?

When Calluses Tear Off....How to Deal with

I explained to you a while ago how to take a little bit of gauze and some sports tape to tape your hands where the calluses are. Basically tape around your hand at the palm and around where the calluses are. First you put on a think layer of gauze. This is to keep the tape from sticking to your calluses. Then you lightly tape around all this. Just enough tape to provide a layer between the bar and your skin but not enough to interfere with your lifting. Some chalk helps with this as well in case the tape interferes with gripping. This does two things. It keeps calluses from getting ripped off because the friction is against the tape instead of the calluses and it is thin so it still allows pressure against the skin which develops the calluses and makes them harder. Your problem is not having calluses, it's having underdeveloped ones that rip off too easily. This doesn't happen to others as often as it happens to you.