all posts post new thread

Bodyweight Convict Conditioning vs Naked Warrior

Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
The 2 programs are so different that your goals and schedule will have a huge impact on which one is better for you. NW is about using very few BW exercise as a minimalistic strength-is-a-skill program without equipment that you can do throughout the day almost every day. CC is about using 4-6 exercise progressions with more traditional dedicated training sessions done once a week per exercise that go from lighter exercises done for higher reps to more difficult exercises with lower rep ranges.
 
Last edited:
marvinthemartian said:
The 2 programs are so different that your goals and schedule will have a huge impact on which one is better for you. NW is about using very few BW exercise as a minimalistic strength-is-a-skill program without equipment that you can do throughout the day almost every day. CC is about using 4-6 exercise progressions with more traditional dedicated training sessions done once a week per exercise that go from lighter exercises done for higher reps to more difficult exercises with lower rep ranges.
Click to expand...

So NW is more of a GTG-type program?
 
NormanOsborn said:
So NW is more of a GTG-type program?
Click to expand...
No. It is THE GTG program. :D

Just from reading the books I personally would favor CC because it is more well rounded and I don't want to think about training at work. But I really don't like the programs in the CC book. You are supposed to only do 2-3 work sets per exercise progression per week. So one training day per exercise progression. The more advanced programs have 3-5 work sets twice a week which sounds more reasonable. But I haven't tried it so maybe that's how you get super strong.
 
Last edited:
One could easily cycle between blocks of CC and blocks of NW/SFB.

When looking at the whole SFB curriculum you are closer to CC in terms of number of exercises. It's mostly the approach (high tension etc) and rep/set ranges that vary. CC starts off with much easier progressions than the SFB curriculum too. CC also includes some questionable progressions, like shoulder stand squats and the pistol progression with the foot on a basketball is also highly questionable. I also like the SF approach to HLRs more than the one in CC. The SFB curriculum doesn't include questionable progressions just for the sake of having ten steps.

That being said, Get Strong is also a simple alternative to CC.
 
marvinthemartian said:
No. It is THE GTG program. :D

Just from reading the books I personally would favor CC because it is more well rounded and I don't want to think about training at work. But I really don't like the programs in the CC book. You are supposed to only do 2-3 work sets per exercise progression per week. So one training day per exercise progression. The more advanced programs have 3-5 work sets twice a week which sounds more reasonable. But I haven't tried it so maybe that's how you get super strong.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think NW is a better fit for me. While I'm always careful with volume and the effect it can have on my joints, I think multiple sessions across the week would yield greater strength gains than one day per week. Even if the volume is actually lower than one big CC session.
 
Benjamin Renaud said:
One could easily cycle between blocks of CC and blocks of NW/SFB.

When looking at the whole SFB curriculum you are closer to CC in terms of number of exercises. It's mostly the approach (high tension etc) and rep/set ranges that vary. CC starts off with much easier progressions than the SFB curriculum too. CC also includes some questionable progressions, like shoulder stand squats and the pistol progression with the foot on a basketball is also highly questionable. I also like the SF approach to HLRs more than the one in CC. The SFB curriculum doesn't include questionable progressions just for the sake of having ten steps.

That being said, Get Strong is also a simple alternative to CC.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was looking mainly at NW combined with S&S Swings, rather than the full SFB.

Is Get Strong another Bodyweight program?
 
I never got on that well with CC myself. There's a lot of 'padding'; the book is longer than it needs to be and the progressions are a little arbitrary in some cases and have far too much text explaining them (all the 'flavour text' about prison stuff does the book no favours either). The program is fine but nothing all that special.

If you're looking for a 'grab-bag' of bodyweight exercises with progressions/regressions then Mark Lauren's You Are Your Own Gym is every bit as worthwhile, while containing a lot less fluff.

For getting the most out of your strength without information overload, NW is the one for me. Similarly to Power! To The People, it distills the basic principles of maximal force generation down to some easy-to-follow key points and, for me, was invaluable: I don't think I'd have ever been able to get to grips with the one arm push up without it.

I've no doubt the SFB course would be the nect logical step for someone looking to maximise their strength potential without access to a gym/equipment.
 
NormanOsborn said:
Yeah, I was looking mainly at NW combined with S&S Swings, rather than the full SFB.

Is Get Strong another Bodyweight program?
Click to expand...
The SF blog also has a couple bodyweight programs. Fabio Zonins Simple Strength for Difficult times could fit your needs: Simple Strength for Difficult Times: An 8-Week Progressive Plan | StrongFirst

It's done with exercise done in the 8-10RM range. So you could even do the CC progression with it.
FZ-Weekly-Schedule-700px.jpg

FZ-8-Week-Plan-700px-1.jpg
 
marvinthemartian said:
No. It is THE GTG program. :D

Just from reading the books I personally would favor CC because it is more well rounded and I don't want to think about training at work. But I really don't like the programs in the CC book. You are supposed to only do 2-3 work sets per exercise progression per week. So one training day per exercise progression. The more advanced programs have 3-5 work sets twice a week which sounds more reasonable. But I haven't tried it so maybe that's how you get super strong.
Click to expand...


If the exercises compliment or overlap each other this approach will work fine. If they don't it will be a slow train coming.
 
North Coast Miller said:
If the exercises compliment or overlap each other this approach will work fine. If they don't it will be a slow train coming.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I personally don't think that one session per week is enough to make significant gains. It's the same with Barbell training, particularly upper body exercises like Bench, which can be tough to progress on. I personally bench one day per week with a Football Bar, and use Dumbbell Hex Press as my other pressing exercise on my second session.
 
marvinthemartian said:
The SF blog also has a couple bodyweight programs. Fabio Zonins Simple Strength for Difficult times could fit your needs: Simple Strength for Difficult Times: An 8-Week Progressive Plan | StrongFirst

It's done with exercise done in the 8-10RM range. So you could even do the CC progression with it.
FZ-Weekly-Schedule-700px.jpg

FZ-8-Week-Plan-700px-1.jpg
Click to expand...
I'm looking forward to trying this plan in the near future. It's not always easy finding a regression that allows 8-10RM with bodyweight though. I kind of always fall either too low like a 1-5RM or too high at 10-15RM.
 
NormanOsborn said:
Is Get Strong another Bodyweight program?
Click to expand...
It's a book/program by the Kavadlo's. You can find the ebook for free on FB. Danny gave a link to it at the start of the pandemic. It's very progressive calisthenics oriented but less fluff and useless progressions than CC. I personally enjoyed it. Bringing SF principles to it makes it even better. It can easily be adapted by modifying rep ranges and using L/M/H days by moving forward or back in the programming.

I wouldn't try to do it alongside S&S though, like you were thinking for NW. I'd never add anything to S&S unless doing it only 2-3 days per week. Even then I wouldn't add more than pull-ups.
 
One issue with NW is that gtg doesn't fit my lifestyle. My schedule is most compatible with a near daily work out of about 30 minutes duration.

I think the progressions in CC are mostly decent but the low frequency programming has gotten some criticism.
 
marvinthemartian said:
The 2 programs are so different that your goals and schedule will have a huge impact on which one is better for you. NW is about using very few BW exercise as a minimalistic strength-is-a-skill program without equipment that you can do throughout the day almost every day. CC is about using 4-6 exercise progressions with more traditional dedicated training sessions done once a week per exercise that go from lighter exercises done for higher reps to more difficult exercises with lower rep ranges.
Click to expand...

One could always customise CC to fit one's goals. For example, if one only wished to focus on Push Ups and Leg Raises, for example, one would have more days in which to train them. So one would could split the volume across two days.

Instead of doing 2 x 30 Half-Push Ups in a single session, you could do 1 set of 30 on both days. The same split could be done with Leg Raises.
 
NormanOsborn said:
One could always customise CC to fit one's goals. For example, if one only wished to focus on Push Ups and Leg Raises, for example, one would have more days in which to train them. So one would could split the volume across two days.

Instead of doing 2 x 30 Half-Push Ups in a single session, you could do 1 set of 30 on both days. The same split could be done with Leg Raises.
Click to expand...
I'd rather do ladders of full push-ups and get 60 total reps than do 2x30 half push-ups.
 
Benjamin Renaud said:
I'd rather do ladders of full push-ups and get 60 total reps than do 2x30 half push-ups.
Click to expand...

I was referring to the specific CC progression for Push Ups which, if memory serves, goes something like: Wall Push Ups, Incline PU's, Half PU's and then various forms of Full PU's before attaining the OAPU.

If you can already do full Push Ups with good form, then Ladders would probably be a better choice. For beginners, the CC method might be better.
 
NormanOsborn said:
One could always customise CC to fit one's goals. For example, if one only wished to focus on Push Ups and Leg Raises, for example, one would have more days in which to train them. So one would could split the volume across two days.

Instead of doing 2 x 30 Half-Push Ups in a single session, you could do 1 set of 30 on both days. The same split could be done with Leg Raises.
Click to expand...
Yeah, of course. There is also no reason to stick to the 10 step progression as written. Or to attempt to work up to one arm pull ups or one arm hand stand pushups at all. But you asked about CC and this once a week per exercise progression is what the author had in mind for programming. And he only recommends twice a week per progression for more advanced people who are more interested in conditioning than strength.

EDIT: Here are the CC progressions in case anyone wants to see it.
Convict-Conditioning-Progressions-Wall-Chart.jpg
 
Last edited:
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom