all posts post new thread

Programming Improv Chad Waterbury high frequency training program

Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)

bluejeff

Level 7 Valued Member
I came across this old article by Chad Waterbury about how to implement a high frequency approach to a muscle group. I'm not sure how applicable this is to a singular exercise for strength gains, per se, but it's an interesting approach to hypertrophy, and the progression scheme is really intriguing.

I haven't figured it out yet, but I'd like to implement something akin to this for my own HFT style of training.

 
I've really been interested in his high frequency stuff. Right now I'm doing hanging and crawling every day, but when I hit my goals I think I'm going to swap it out for this daily work:

 
I came across this old article by Chad Waterbury about how to implement a high frequency approach to a muscle group. I'm not sure how applicable this is to a singular exercise for strength gains, per se, but it's an interesting approach to hypertrophy, and the progression scheme is really intriguing.

I haven't figured it out yet, but I'd like to implement something akin to this for my own HFT style of training.

You need a PhD to understand that workout. “If Tuesday is this and you did that before then …” I lift weights for the reason that I like things to be simple. In fact, on that topic, how come I’ve met powerlifters so dumb they can’t tie their own shoelaces yet they understand Conjugate training? I’ve got a masters degree and I don’t understand Conjugate training
 
Also, about the PLP program, this guy combined it with Dan John's 40 Day Plan and had great results:



The nerdfitness guy also tried PLP and was happy with it:


Before the end of the year, I want to do the PLP / 40 Day Plan combination, but I don't have access to a barbell so I was thinking I'd do some research and turn up a 40 Day Plan / Simple Strength version of kettlebells.
 
You need a PhD to understand that workout. “If Tuesday is this and you did that before then …” I lift weights for the reason that I like things to be simple. In fact, on that topic, how come I’ve met powerlifters so dumb they can’t tie their own shoelaces yet they understand Conjugate training? I’ve got a masters degree and I don’t understand Conjugate training
Amen
And unless I’m missing something there isn’t even an RPE assigned to the rep ranges.

My response:
“Give it a go!”

My thoughts:
 
how come I’ve met powerlifters so dumb they can’t tie their own shoelaces yet they understand Conjugate training? I’ve got a masters degree and I don’t understand Conjugate training
Young grasshopper, this is the paradox.
You must be dumb to grasp the conjugate. Like sand in your fist. If you try too hard it will escape you.
(Joking, but it be like that sometimes)

We've had sales people that were not very bright, but damn if you let them talk long enough they could convince you of anything. They could not explain how they did it at all except using basic principles you would find in any sales book that just don't make sense if you think about them for 5 minutes. I assume conjugate is like that.
 
You need a PhD to understand that workout. “If Tuesday is this and you did that before then …” I lift weights for the reason that I like things to be simple. In fact, on that topic, how come I’ve met powerlifters so dumb they can’t tie their own shoelaces yet they understand Conjugate training? I’ve got a masters degree and I don’t understand Conjugate training

Amen
And unless I’m missing something there isn’t even an RPE assigned to the rep ranges.

My response:
“Give it a go!”

My thoughts:


I did have to read it a couple times, but I don't think it's that complex. It's definitely not any more complex than some of the SF programs I've read on the site.

-Each week, you do up to five sessions, or more if you can recover

-The first day of the week, you do sets of 3 at a relatively high intensity ( assuming you've been training for 3+ years, which most of us have)

-Each session for the week, you add 3 (or more if you can handle it) reps per set. As the reps per set increase, you decrease the intensity of the exercise either by reducing weight or changing the exercise itself.

-You use his table to determine a total volume range (reps times sets) for each session ( for 3+yr. training age, that's 24-32 total reps).

From the article:
"The key point is that you should stay on the lower end of the set-rep volume range for the lower rep/higher load workouts; and stay on the higher end of the spectrum for the higher rep/lower load workouts."

So you're basically doing low-rep, higher weight earlier in the week, and then progressively, over the week, reducing the load and increasing the volume. Then he basically says to do the compound versions of the exercises as their own session, and do the single-joint stuff alongside your other training.

Having read other stuff by Waterbury regarding high frequency training, the common points seem to be:

- Movement variability. That is, if you're training "pressing muscles" just do different kinds of presses: pushups, HSPU, military press, dips. . .

-Progression by adding volume

-Varying the load

In other words, "you can do the same thing every day, as long as you don't do the same thing every day."

The ONE thing I didn't understand (if it was even included) was how to progress the program over time. I understand the weekly progression, but the week-to-week progression didn't seem to be included.
 
I came across this old article by Chad Waterbury about how to implement a high frequency approach to a muscle group. I'm not sure how applicable this is to a singular exercise for strength gains, per se, but it's an interesting approach to hypertrophy, and the progression scheme is really intriguing.

I haven't figured it out yet, but I'd like to implement something akin to this for my own HFT style of training.

The variety/specificity paradox. It’s quite simple and works well.

I’ve used it with a variety of moves. It’s fun and the muscle growth/strength increase is shocking.

The key is variety. Variety in the load/movement emphasis. For example. The OAOLP can be practiced by doing

OAP
OAP planks
Slow begatives
Variety of heights
Pauses/ROM engancements
Bottoms up OAP
Hand assisted/band assisted

The key is to work the same move but vary the emphasis. For muscle growth, CW recommends altering angles and heavy/light days. For example for the chest you might do inclines one day, then dips the following.

Not really all that complicated.
 
You need a PhD to understand that workout. “If Tuesday is this and you did that before then …” I lift weights for the reason that I like things to be simple. In fact, on that topic, how come I’ve met powerlifters so dumb they can’t tie their own shoelaces yet they understand Conjugate training? I’ve got a masters degree and I don’t understand Conjugate training

I think Waterbury is the guy who once wrote a program where you needed to know your 27 rep max.
 
Like others have already stated. This is not all that complicated guys. And not everything requires an RPE.

Chad Waterbury knows his stuff especially when it comes to high frequency training. Give it a go OP.
 
I really like Chad Waterbury's stuff too. A lot of his concepts and variations of high frequency training has gotten me the best results I've ever had. I tried his Bodybuilding's Next Frontier workout before with great success. It is easy to follow, just look up the day you are on and do the workout. It is VERY well planned, I tend to burn out easily but despite high frequency with fairly heavy loads and some twice daily sessions I felt very fresh throughout. I didn't keep exact records but got noticeably stronger and gained about 5 pounds while staying lean.

His PLP program and total number of reps system is epic too.

Great to see a mention of Anthony Mychal, a lot of his earlier writings are terrific for training philosophy. I saw FAST and EASY strength gains doing his "Stoic Singles" for squats.
 
I love Waterbury's ideas and programs, but I always find his tone for T-nation articles to be weird. He's not like that in interviews at all. Was/is there some unwritten rule that you have to make a certain amount sarcastic jokes to write articles on T-nation?? I often see it in articles by different people.
 
I may be wrong, but my understanding is that T-Nation edits the articles, sometimes (often?) without the author's consent. This may be where the tone comes from (or the author gets hints that such a tone is expected).
 
I may be wrong, but my understanding is that T-Nation edits the articles, sometimes (often?) without the author's consent. This may be where the tone comes from (or the author gets hints that such a tone is expected).
If that's true, i'd be upset if I were an author. I can see then, why there's always a picture of some super jacked guy who's very likely on PEDs alongside articles where he clearly didn't use that method to get that big.
 
It happened to Dan John at least. See for example this thread Dan's 10,000 Rep KB Swing Workout -.

With the author's comment: "That might be my most edited piece ever. We all noticed good changes, but I would have to go back to the original to figure out what I said and meant."

Basically, the text was changed so much that the author didn't remember his exact intent in the manuscript. I think they also changed the program (one kettlebell size for all sets, instead of changing weight (reducing it as the number of reps goes up) as recommanded in the original program).
 
I’ve always enjoyed Chad’s work. “Huge in a Hurry”was always a great resource for me.

He and Pavel worked together a lot in the past and shared a lot of similar ideas regarding training. For example, Chad’s programs are usually quite bare bones, centering mainly around compound lifts.

Both are also great writers, mingling their works with amusing anecdotes and interesting historical context to construct their metaphors for training.

High frequency training is probably one of the most beneficial tools for an athlete looking to improve a skill or movement. Most powerlifters at my gym have abandoned the low frequency/high volume approach for more frequent training sessions.

As opposed to pushing the pedal to the metal once a week, you’ll see them use a variety of main lift mutations as discussed by Pavel in PRTP PRo. Such things such as pause deadlifts, safety bar squats and benches with the duffalo bar.

These lifts force the lifter to use lighter weights to really hone in one the specific range of improvement on the main lifts. Lighter weights allow greater frequency.

Another chapter in PTTP Pro (on Dikul) touches on isolation exercise use a la Louie Simmons method, where a day after the main lift, smaller single joint exercises are used to emphasize the contraction of an individual muscle group. Note that these isolation exercises are reserved for one or two muscle groups that aren’t firing at full potential during the main movement.

I think the reason many burnout with high frequency is that they treat the sessions as workouts as opposed to practice, which is often a problem with GTG. Where Chad lists specific loading/volume parameters, Pavel’s programs rely on the instinct and restraint of the trainee, a trait that many lifters have trouble harnessing.
 
If that's true, i'd be upset if I were an author. I can see then, why there's always a picture of some super jacked guy who's very likely on PEDs alongside articles where he clearly didn't use that method to get that big.
Most sites including strongfirst edit articles for publication on their site.
 
Interesting. Although hardly counter-intuitive for those who do or have done other high frequency plans, ahem.
Obviously sort of kind of different from gtg but very very very similar to the machinery of S&S.....almost daily v daily. With tiny progressive loading, a rep here and there but S&S is months and into years rather than 60 days.

Where Chad lists specific loading/volume parameters, Pavel’s programs rely on the instinct and restraint of the trainee, a trait that many lifters have trouble harnessing.

Might take it for a spin though, although not up to the 10 pull up reps.
The success, or otherwise, of it I suspect, for no other reason than having never done it, is perhaps about doing it at the appropriate time....ie other stuff in life not causing too much stress and choosing the moment.
Not the only reason but certainly a big part of Pavel's approach....
Think....and maybe pleasantly surprised....that I'll get into 25-30 reps pull ups and start struggling and will 'feel' the need to wave or have light days....but perhaps I've become accustomed to that mindset.

Thanks for posting, could be, might be worth a visit...
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom