all posts post new thread

Bodyweight OAOLPU progression method?

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

@Kozushi
Slow negatives (even slow negatives using partials) helps pretty well. This is the same logic than the slow negatives for OAC.

Otherwise, did you try some weighted push ups in slow motion ?

Kind regards,

Pet'
 
Hello,

@Kozushi
Slow negatives (even slow negatives using partials) helps pretty well. This is the same logic than the slow negatives for OAC.

Otherwise, did you try some weigthed push ups in slow motion ?

Kind regards,

Pet'
No. I just did it like that - half one handed pushups.

I used regular pushups for conditioning work. I found it a bit odd that the Naked Warrior book doesn't concern itself with cardio-conditioning. PTTP doesn't either actually. I guess these two books were early products of Pavel's thought, so that is why. The later ETK and S&S books both feature conditioning components.

Anyhow, I used regular 2h pushups with full extensions of the arms to function as conditioning - 10X10, with the 1h pushups and the pistols for strength.

It actually worked brilliantly. Good stuff.
 
Hello,


You are right. IMO, this is the main NW drawback actually.

In terms of bdw conditioning, some options can be considered, such as M. Furey's program :
Matt Furey on Body Weight Exercises
Matt Furey Exercises
Combat Conditioning | T Nation

Kind regards,

Pet'

I don't find it to be a drawback, but rather a matter of focus. The topic of the NW is a minimalist BW approach to physical training, not an exhaustive resource for all physical training. Most of Pavel's work acknowleges certain omissions and mentions a reason for it. I would offer that Pavel's work should be considered within scope of all of his work, his background and experience; then a clear azimuth emerges. If you don't share some of that in common with him in some way, you might miss it.

Respectfully,

JonS
 
Hello,

@JonS
The term drawback maybe is a bit strong...even too strong. I admit it. What I wanted to say is that considering my goals, strength is not the only one purpose. That is why I always add a minimum of conditioning to my routine.

Nonetheless, NW remains the most powerful and minimalistic strength routine I know. I am clearly in love with it and its principles.

Kind regards,

Pet'
 
I don't find it to be a drawback, but rather a matter of focus. The topic of the NW is a minimalist BW approach to physical training, not an exhaustive resource for all physical training. Most of Pavel's work acknowleges certain omissions and mentions a reason for it. I would offer that Pavel's work should be considered within scope of all of his work, his background and experience; then a clear azimuth emerges. If you don't share some of that in common with him in some way, you might miss it.

Respectfully,

JonS
He also respects us the readers in that he gives us ideas which we can develop or incorporate into our own programmes and lives. I think as time went on he realized than many of his readership feel helplessly clueless about how to design a good programme and he started to get more prescriptive, for instance in ETK and S&S.

It seems to me that of NW, ROP and S&S the one that generates the most strength is actually NW, since you're loading more weight onto your body with it.

But, NW is also harder to do than the others.

Anyhow, NW is amazing.
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom