In this article by Pavel from 2017 ...
... he says,
"Once you have put in your time and effort, and reached the 'simple' goals — 16kg for get-ups and 24kg for swings for ladies; and 32kg in both events for gents for the specified sets, reps, and times — you may carry on using the same simple template inspired by old-time strongmen.
"Or, you may start 'waving' your volume in the manner of Soviet weightlifters. Multiple studies have documented the greater effectiveness of “waved” training for experienced athletes."
What follows is my approach to easing into variability for a new, middle-aged student with almost no athletic background who is obese but reasonably functional otherwise, e.g., he can do a goblet squat to parallel and he can do a bodyweight-only getup.
I have recently programmed him for variability much earlier in his development than the article suggests. He's a mature, successful adult who is, I feel, able to stick to a plan that's more complex than 100 swings a day, 5 days a week. The big question is, "Will he benefit from the increased variability?" Related questions: is the advisability of holding off on variability until a student is advanced due to physical concerns or more about trust a student's ability to follow a program?
The Details:
So far, I've programmed 8 weeks for him, and following the guidance of the article, I'm keeping the NL (number of lifts) at 2000 total per 4-week period because this is what the article does: it takes the average of 5 days a week x 100 swings a day x 4 weeks and doesn't change but redistributes it into weeks of 300, 400, 600 and 700 swings. In the article, the daily volume is varied between 60 and 200 swings, and the number of training days varied between 3 and 5.
I recall from PlanStrong that greater variability is, indeed, something to be worked up to, so I've limited the variability quite a bit (and 200 swings in a single day frightened me for a new trainee). My student has done his first two weeks of swings as 24 kg x 2-handed x 100 per day, 5 days per week. What I've done is make his next 4 weeks NL of 520, 480, 500, and 460, using days of 60, 80, 100, 120, and a single day of 140, and sticking to 5 days a week, thus NL = 1960. And for his second 4-week block, I've included a single 160 swing session, 3 x 140 swing sessions, NL of 540, 400, 560, and 500. The 400 swing week will feature only 4 lifting days instead of 5.
I'm curious if those of you familiar with PlanStrong have any experience in doing this "ease in" kind of programming for your students and any other observations you may have about how closely I've hewn to the spirt of PlanStrong or not. Here is it in a chart-like format:
Preparatory Week #1: 100 swings a day, 5 days a week
Preparatory Week #2: same
Week 1 (Apr 3) : 120, 80, 120, 80, 120 = 520
Week 2 (Apr 10): 80, 120, 80, 120, 80 = 480
Week 3 (Apr 17): 140, 80, 120, 60, 100 = 500
Week 4 (Apr 24): 60, 80, 100, 120, 100 = 460
Week 5 (May 1): 80, 140, 80, 140, 100 = 540
Week 6 (May 8): 120, 80, 120, 80 (no 5th day) = 400
Week 7 May 15): 100, 160, 80, 120, 100 = 560
Week 8 (May 22): 60, 80, 100, 120, 140 = 500
The idea is that in weeks 9 - 12, I'll include variability of weekly NL between 400 and 600 and include at least a single 180 swing session, and continue to work my way out to NL of 300 - 700 with at least one 200 swing sessions as we continue to move forward, so probably 16 weeks to reach the kind of variability the article talks about.
I realize that for those who've only read the article and not attended PlanStrong might find this a pretty deep dive into the weeds. (And those of you who haven't read the article and haven't attended PlanStrong may have little-to-no idea what I might be going on about.)
Looking forward to your comments.
-S-
From Simple to Sinister: Waving Volume on S&S | StrongFirst
The "From Simple to Sinister" program takes the original Simple & Sinister and applies proven Soviet techniques of waving volume. Here's how to do it.
www.strongfirst.com
... he says,
"Once you have put in your time and effort, and reached the 'simple' goals — 16kg for get-ups and 24kg for swings for ladies; and 32kg in both events for gents for the specified sets, reps, and times — you may carry on using the same simple template inspired by old-time strongmen.
"Or, you may start 'waving' your volume in the manner of Soviet weightlifters. Multiple studies have documented the greater effectiveness of “waved” training for experienced athletes."
What follows is my approach to easing into variability for a new, middle-aged student with almost no athletic background who is obese but reasonably functional otherwise, e.g., he can do a goblet squat to parallel and he can do a bodyweight-only getup.
I have recently programmed him for variability much earlier in his development than the article suggests. He's a mature, successful adult who is, I feel, able to stick to a plan that's more complex than 100 swings a day, 5 days a week. The big question is, "Will he benefit from the increased variability?" Related questions: is the advisability of holding off on variability until a student is advanced due to physical concerns or more about trust a student's ability to follow a program?
The Details:
So far, I've programmed 8 weeks for him, and following the guidance of the article, I'm keeping the NL (number of lifts) at 2000 total per 4-week period because this is what the article does: it takes the average of 5 days a week x 100 swings a day x 4 weeks and doesn't change but redistributes it into weeks of 300, 400, 600 and 700 swings. In the article, the daily volume is varied between 60 and 200 swings, and the number of training days varied between 3 and 5.
I recall from PlanStrong that greater variability is, indeed, something to be worked up to, so I've limited the variability quite a bit (and 200 swings in a single day frightened me for a new trainee). My student has done his first two weeks of swings as 24 kg x 2-handed x 100 per day, 5 days per week. What I've done is make his next 4 weeks NL of 520, 480, 500, and 460, using days of 60, 80, 100, 120, and a single day of 140, and sticking to 5 days a week, thus NL = 1960. And for his second 4-week block, I've included a single 160 swing session, 3 x 140 swing sessions, NL of 540, 400, 560, and 500. The 400 swing week will feature only 4 lifting days instead of 5.
I'm curious if those of you familiar with PlanStrong have any experience in doing this "ease in" kind of programming for your students and any other observations you may have about how closely I've hewn to the spirt of PlanStrong or not. Here is it in a chart-like format:
Preparatory Week #1: 100 swings a day, 5 days a week
Preparatory Week #2: same
Week 1 (Apr 3) : 120, 80, 120, 80, 120 = 520
Week 2 (Apr 10): 80, 120, 80, 120, 80 = 480
Week 3 (Apr 17): 140, 80, 120, 60, 100 = 500
Week 4 (Apr 24): 60, 80, 100, 120, 100 = 460
Week 5 (May 1): 80, 140, 80, 140, 100 = 540
Week 6 (May 8): 120, 80, 120, 80 (no 5th day) = 400
Week 7 May 15): 100, 160, 80, 120, 100 = 560
Week 8 (May 22): 60, 80, 100, 120, 140 = 500
The idea is that in weeks 9 - 12, I'll include variability of weekly NL between 400 and 600 and include at least a single 180 swing session, and continue to work my way out to NL of 300 - 700 with at least one 200 swing sessions as we continue to move forward, so probably 16 weeks to reach the kind of variability the article talks about.
I realize that for those who've only read the article and not attended PlanStrong might find this a pretty deep dive into the weeds. (And those of you who haven't read the article and haven't attended PlanStrong may have little-to-no idea what I might be going on about.)
Looking forward to your comments.
-S-