all posts post new thread

Other/Mixed Pavel Asking You for Article Ideas

Other strength modalities (e.g., Clubs), mixed strength modalities (e.g., combined kettlebell and barbell), other goals (flexibility)
Simply strong said:
When to include assistance exercises and in what manner. If your program minimum is deadlifts and bench press what would you program in and for what purposes.
Click to expand...
These need to be chosen specifically for each lifter; I think - again, just IMO - this falls into the domain of an experienced coach. When I am picking assistance exercises for myself, I generally go for the thing I like the least and look like a bumbling idiot while performing. Those criteria usually get me doing something that helps.

Again, JMO.

-S-
 
1. A second-wind program minimum protocol - some breathing exercises to do daily and stay healthy.
2. Discussing the protocols for grapplers (BJJ Fanatics Training Plan) vs. protocols for strikers. Should the latter follow the same or a totally different template.
3. Last, but certainly not least, clarifying once and for all differences in adaptation between "pure" A+A snatches, EMOM snatches, strength aerobics with ballistics v. strength aerobics with grinds etc.
 
Last edited:
offwidth said:
Exactly my point.

But easy walking whilst a wonderful activity in it’s own right (and one I enjoy) both physically and mentally, will also, unless performed above ZR is not going to develop that aerobic base either. Leaving one with a deficit.

However this maybe should be discussed in another thread as it’s deviated a bit from this threads original intent.
Click to expand...
It’d make a good article though… what aerobic base should a SF disciple have? Or is it out of lane for what is, fundamentally, a S&C methodology? Perhaps. It’s also quite individual for sportspeople; this is, after all, GPP. What is aerobic GPP?

I agree with you offwidth that walking a few miles is almost certainly not enough to develop a sufficient aerobic base for complete fitness, but worth a studied consideration I think. The WTH effect perhaps lures people into thinking that because they can perform at a test (e.g multi stage fitness test), they are aerobically sound, which might not be true. Don’t know, not done the sciencey bit yet!
 
MikeL said:
It’d make a good article though… what aerobic base should a SF disciple have? Or is it out of lane for what is, fundamentally, a S&C methodology? Perhaps. It’s also quite individual for sportspeople; this is, after all, GPP. What is aerobic GPP?

I agree with you offwidth that walking a few miles is almost certainly not enough to develop a sufficient aerobic base for complete fitness, but worth a studied consideration I think. The WTH effect perhaps lures people into thinking that because they can perform at a test (e.g multi stage fitness test), they are aerobically sound, which might not be true. Don’t know, not done the sciencey bit yet!
Click to expand...
Agreed…! All good discussion points. To your point it probably does ‘depend’; but just as S&S Simple is considered by many around here as a good baseline or jumping off point for more advanced strength, what would be the ‘aerobic equivalent’? And can, could, should one have both? Again… depends, but from my perspective… why not?
 
offwidth said:
Agreed…! All good discussion points. To your point it probably does ‘depend’; but just as S&S Simple is considered by many around here as a good baseline or jumping off point for more advanced strength, what would be the ‘aerobic equivalent’? And can, could, should one have both? Again… depends, but from my perspective… why not?
Click to expand...
The need for something is dictated by so many factors - goals, needs, perceptions, place & way of living, age, health state, all that changes our point of view either, subconsciously or deliberately, it's neverending uroboros. In my opinion, creating THE standard is impossible. You can create a bunch and choose from, but something for everyone won't go further than "Be strong, move well, be active".
 
DocMike said:
I might write about my experience with Rogozhnikov + S&S and the mixing of KB and BB training.
Click to expand...
I was hoping for this.

I’m very curious about the intricacies of this programming ever since I picked up PTTP Pro. It seems very loose compared to a lot of other programs with rigid schedules. The lift variations, lack of percentages and low frequency are very anti-Sheiko and Smolov.

I feel without a coach, it’d be solid for advanced lifters but difficult without guidance for newer/weaker lifters who cannot judge their bodies as well or haven’t developed a base level strength and good technique.(which is why it’s in PTTP PRO)

I, on the other end of the spectrum, have just completed the Smolov Jr. bench specialization program, completing the last day today. I hope to share my experience of high frequency/high volume and ultra-specialization with StrongFirst after my heavy single in a week.
 
1. An article discussing how to properly perform the dips portion mentioned in the Q&D book.
2. Suggestions on TGU replacements for those who like swings but may not enjoy TGU or can't perform them safely.
3. A "program minimum" for stretching. A short article of maybe the 2-4 most important stretches to perform on off days.
4. and selfishly, more programs specifically designed for sports. golf, baseball, basketball, etc.
 
Philippe Geoffrion said:
I was hoping for this.

I’m very curious about the intricacies of this programming ever since I picked up PTTP Pro. It seems very loose compared to a lot of other programs with rigid schedules. The lift variations, lack of percentages and low frequency are very anti-Sheiko and Smolov.

I feel without a coach, it’d be solid for advanced lifters but difficult without guidance for newer/weaker lifters who cannot judge their bodies as well or haven’t developed a base level strength and good technique.(which is why it’s in PTTP PRO)

I, on the other end of the spectrum, have just completed the Smolov Jr. bench specialization program, completing the last day today. I hope to share my experience of high frequency/high volume and ultra-specialization with StrongFirst after my heavy single in a week.
Click to expand...
Philippe,

I have been running this combo for about 3 months and prior to that was running my own mesh-up of conjugate and HLM from Andy Baker. Rather than write an article I may post an interactive training blog as others are also interested.
 
DocMike said:
Philippe,

I have been running this combo for about 3 months and prior to that was running my own mesh-up of conjugate and HLM from Andy Baker. Rather than write an article I may post an interactive training blog as others are also interested.
Click to expand...
I will look forward to this.
 
Bauer said:
or 033 with Viking Push Presses for that matter!
Click to expand...
james_1127 said:
I've used the VPP with 044 format and treated it like the snatch
Click to expand...
I've experimented with double cleans and power pushups together in 033 and found they don't work well together. There's enough deltoid fatigue from catching the bells in the rack that it really interferes with the power pushups.

I'd expect the VPP to be even worse in this regard.

I'd expect the VPP to be much better suited as a standalone drill like the snatch using 044 (I use double cleans this way too).
 
I was just reading an old thread showing peoples training spaces. One comment was “the best thing about SF is when people say ‘you dont look like you could lift that’” - got me thinking about this thread and others; so many people are asking for hypertrophy, but a lot of SF methodology does not lend itself to hypertrophy. It’s often the opposite of volume or TuT which popularly cue growth.

So… be good to read about that. Is there a place in StrongFirst for hypertrophy? Or is it a happy coincidence for some programs?
 
MikeL said:
I was just reading an old thread showing peoples training spaces. One comment was “the best thing about SF is when people say ‘you dont look like you could lift that’” - got me thinking about this thread and others; so many people are asking for hypertrophy, but a lot of SF methodology does not lend itself to hypertrophy. It’s often the opposite of volume or TuT which popularly cue growth.

So… be good to read about that. Is there a place in StrongFirst for hypertrophy? Or is it a happy coincidence for some programs?
Click to expand...
Built Strong?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom