Barbell Adjusting Percentages/Sets/Reps Between Geared and Raw

[Steve Freides]

Intro:
I have to start by saying I know I'm asking an impossible question - I grant that.

But for argument's sake, let's take this 2013 blog

StrongFirst and the 5x5 Method | StrongFirst

and talk about how one might adjust the numbers for a raw lifter.


More Detail:
I assume that, at a minimum, we need some kind of numbers about how much benefit a geared lifter gets from his/her gear. And there's plenty else to talk about, e.g., since a squat suit is going to help more at the bottom than at the top, the very choice of lifts, partial lifts, assistance lifts, and the like is going to change.

But, all that aside, let's pick a number. Since the article is about Brad Gillingham, I happened to find this

Brad Gillingham, R-M2, 120+, 272.5, 207.5, 325, 805 kg

I believe that means 120+ is is weight class, 272.5 is his BP, 207.5 is his SQ, and 325 is his DL, and 805 kg is his total. The numbers above reference a meet from 10/10/2017. I also found references to a 1057.5 kg total, presumably geared, and from 2010. Brad was born in 1966. The blog, written in 2013, mentions a recent IPF world championship, presumably geared, at age 46.

Let's speculate, and say how we might change the 5 x 5 routine given as his personal program in the blog, were he going to compete raw and if the percentages were based on his raw 1RM.

If you haven't please read the blog before commenting. The reason I'm asking about all this is that how _low_ the percentages are really jumped out at me - until I realized they were for squats done raw, and the numbers were percentage of a geared 1RM (or at least that how I read the article).

-S-

 

[MikeTheBear]

What struck me about the article was this:

"The 5×5 are done in twenty to thirty minutes, which makes for unusually short rest periods for an elite superheavyweight, makes the session a lot harder than it looks on paper, and biases it towards hypertrophy."

If the goal is to rest as little as possible, then I agree with the statement that the actual training session will be much harder than it looks on paper. I would say that this would be true even if the percentages were applied to a raw squat without any adjustment. Honestly, given that the "bias" of this program is hypertrophy, I would not bother with trying to extrapolate it for a raw lifter who wants to build pure strength. Given the many other flavors of 5x5 out there that have proven track records, I would not re-invent the wheel.

 

[Antti]

From the Wikipedia article (Brad Gillingham - Wikipedia) about Gillingham:

Equipped record lifts are 390/287/400 and raw record lifts are 325/235/382. Something to note is that two of the three raw lifts were done eight years after the equipped lifts. But I've understood that Gillingham has aged well and stayed competitive longer than the typical powerlifter.

 

[Antti]

I compared the squat and bench lifts, as I don't see the deadlift get a big advantage from the equipment. In the bench and the squat the advantage of the gear was ~20%.

I calculated in Excel how much weight each of Gillingham's workout actually used. Then calculated how much that was of his raw 1RM. Here's how it turned out:



It is worth to note that Gillingham lifted all of the squats except week #15 raw and beltless.

But something is wrong in this equation. There is no way he could have done week #13, 5*5 at 93% 1RM. Maybe the percentages are actually from his raw max. In the article there is a mention how the numbers look small, but how the short rest periods make it harder than it looks, and how the program is biased more towards hypertrophy.

@Steve Freides , where did you get the idea that the program was based on the equipped max?

 

[Steve Freides]

@Steve Freides , where did you get the idea that the program was based on the equipped max?

I just assumed, based on the very low percentages - maybe I was wrong to do that.

-S-

 

[jca17]

Also worth noting that short rest here means about 5 minutes. “Short rest” is relative.

 

[william bad butt]

The percentages dont seem that light to me. He works up to almost 80% for 5x5. That seems about right to me

 

[Bill Been]

While it's interesting from a lifting enthusiast standpoint to look at what Brad Gillingham might or might not have done at one point or another, it's not instructive for our own training. I know enough successful lifters to know that you can't say "this guy does X - that's how he trains". They are keenly aware of their own needs in terms of what needs addressed before the next big meet. They know how to manipulate their training variables in order to address them. Guys you've heard of - like Gillingham - arrange their lives to support the requirements of their training: diet, work, family, nutrition, sleep, all revolve around training. Brad Gillingham also deals with a completely different paradigm of training stress application, fatigue management, and adaptive response behavior than we do. The vast majority of the folks on this site could (given a correctly-designed program) apply a training stress, recover from it, adapt to an improved strength level in 48-72 hours then add weight to the bar and repeat the same set/rep scheme. Brad Gillingham would KILL to be able to do that. He has to amass stress events over many, many workouts while carefully managing fatigue in order to (hopefully) manifest a higher strength level weeks if not months later. Finally, there's also the distinct possibility that some of these sessions were the result of autoregulation on Mr. Gillingham's part - going into the gym and not having "it" that day, but still having the moxie to modify the program to accumulate useful stress that day without over-doing it. Looking at the data of that training session obviously wouldn't tell you that story.

The moral of the story is that while it's common to enjoy reading about the approaches of various elite athletes, it has nothing to do with what we personally should do, because.......we're not elite. We have it much easier than they do.

 

[jca17]

Oh. So thats why the article says to do it more frequently if you’re not advanced. Looks like bases are covered

I’m actually more surprised that an advanced lifter would have something to gain from a 5x5 program than I am concerned it wont be enough stimulus for beginner/intermediate.

 

[Antti]

While it's interesting from a lifting enthusiast standpoint to look at what Brad Gillingham might or might not have done at one point or another, it's not instructive for our own training. I know enough successful lifters to know that you can't say "this guy does X - that's how he trains". They are keenly aware of their own needs in terms of what needs addressed before the next big meet. They know how to manipulate their training variables in order to address them. Guys you've heard of - like Gillingham - arrange their lives to support the requirements of their training: diet, work, family, nutrition, sleep, all revolve around training. Brad Gillingham also deals with a completely different paradigm of training stress application, fatigue management, and adaptive response behavior than we do. The vast majority of the folks on this site could (given a correctly-designed program) apply a training stress, recover from it, adapt to an improved strength level in 48-72 hours then add weight to the bar and repeat the same set/rep scheme. Brad Gillingham would KILL to be able to do that. He has to amass stress events over many, many workouts while carefully managing fatigue in order to (hopefully) manifest a higher strength level weeks if not months later. Finally, there's also the distinct possibility that some of these sessions were the result of autoregulation on Mr. Gillingham's part - going into the gym and not having "it" that day, but still having the moxie to modify the program to accumulate useful stress that day without over-doing it. Looking at the data of that training session obviously wouldn't tell you that story.

The moral of the story is that while it's common to enjoy reading about the approaches of various elite athletes, it has nothing to do with what we personally should do, because.......we're not elite. We have it much easier than they do.

You are certainly right that the vast majority of lifters should train differently than the average elite lifter. But... surely that can't be a reason we can't discuss how the elite lift?

First of all, there is the purely speculative side. Some people like to play chess, some like to do maths, some like programming, figuring out the different ways to train and what the great lifters have in common.

Secondly, there must be people on this forum, for whom this discussion isn't pure speculation. There are competitive lifters on this forum, and even more if we count those who have done so previously. Like in this thread itself.

 

[ShawnM]

Brad Gillingham is an interesting individual to use for this. I only say this because his leverages are much different than most people. If I'm not mistaken hes like 6'4-6'5 . Because of his height and long arms he wouldn't get a ton out of a single ply shirt (IPF). If I remember right he also pulled with a hook grip wearing just a singlet. His squat suit would be single ply as well but with his long legs and having to sit much deeper due to the federation he may get a little more carry over.

When I competed I wore double ply shirts with a Velcro back ( Inzer Phenom ). I got crazy push out of the hole, like 50+ pounds. Because of this I only trained full bench on speed days going for 10-12 sets of 3 EMOM as explosively as possible at only 50-60% . My max effort days were a much shorter range of motion using pin presses and board presses. My max double ply shirt bench was 505lbs. My max raw bench was 425lbs. These were completion lifts, the first in the APA and the second in the AAU.

Sorry for the long post, just sharing my own experiences from many moons ago.