Quick and Dead

WhatWouldHulkDo

> 1k Posts
Ugh. Let me grab my cane and hobble up on top of this soapbox over here...

There was a time when journalism had real, monetary value. It was something that people were willing to pay money or attention (to advertisers) for. With that monetization came a trust and responsibility of quality for the producers. A dishonest peddler would quickly vanish in that environment.

Then came them internets. The consumer got conditioned to getting what they want for free. And it now it barely matters if you are producing pure tripe; it became cheap and fast enough to flood the market with free garbage that even the most dishonest (or simply ignorant) peddler can still gather enough pennies from each clickbait piece to survive, and the quality product is outmoded.

The process will continue wherever it can. Music. College. Training advise. Healthcare. Who knows what else. Without a doubt, the best way to rob something of value is to make it free.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to limp off to a cave to die.
 

Dekapon

Triple-Digit Post Count
I notice you don't include any set and rep schemes in your "summary" of Starting Strength. Notice the difference?
I haven't actually read Starting Strength, just heard good things about it. And I get your point but didn't feel like writing more about every book (3x5 and add weight every workout) and making up a sea food recipe (pasta, garlic, olive oil, lemon, oregano and prawns) for the cook book and some words about basic astrophysics. :D

I'm a shareware-guy. If I like a computer program I'll buy the product and recommend it to my friends. Same with books.
 

Steve W.

> 1k Posts
Well, here are a few random thoughts:

--Monetization?

Of course.

StrongFirst is a business, so at some point it has to charge money for SOMETHING.

As a consumer, I want to get good value for my dollar and feel good about what I purchase. In practical term, as a StrongFirst customer I am okay with a model of lower-priced books/videos, mid-priced user courses, and higher-priced in-depth instructor courses. I feel less good about hidden experimental programs and even less good about content that is only revealed at big ticket workshops, but I am not in charge of determining StrongFirst's business model.

I love the fact that people like Tim Anderson and Dan John are so ridiculously generous with free content, that even the the products they do sell are relatively low-priced, and that their first impulse when they think of something that might help people seems to be to immediately share it for free online. However, I sometimes actually feel bad that those two guys aren't able to squeeze more money out of me.

--Proprietary experimental protocols?

I'd favor more open access.

BUT, I can understand keeping access to actual experimental programs limited until the results of the experiment are clear. If your best-intentioned idea turns out not to work well, you don't want it out there under your name, even with the caveat of it not being a proven product.

Actually, I suspect that some past programs, including S&S, were not thoroughly tested before release (RotK strikes me an example of one that came out of the oven way too soon). That's why the DD and SF forums have been so valuable over the years -- they've been where the experimental results start to come in, problems get identified, troubleshooting takes place, and the understanding and interpretation of the program evolves with experience. I'd expect this to still happen even after a substantial amount of pre-release testing, but not in quite the same way or to quite the same extent.

So for that reason I think it's a good thing that there seems to be extensive testing behind Q&D, even if the secret code-numbered cloak and dagger stuff rubs me the wrong way.

-- People using forums to get the content of a book without buying or reading it?

Bothers me, especially if they are obviously dishonest about it, but I don't get too outraged about it either.

Most training programs can be boiled down to a few essential parameters and principles, and if the program gets popular, those things filter into public knowledge -- it's unavoidable.

I do agree that the actual books have a lot of valuable background and guidance beyond the bare essentials, and it is worth it to purchase products whose content I benefit from (from both a consumer and moral standpoint).

--Release dates that are not release dates/unclear communication about when something will be available/"We're working on it"?

Okay, maybe a first world problem, but it looks and feels bad.
 
Last edited:

Dasho

Triple-Digit Post Count
I haven't actually read Starting Strength, just heard good things about it. And I get your point but didn't feel like writing more about every book (3x5 and add weight every workout) and making up a sea food recipe (pasta, garlic, olive oil, lemon, oregano and prawns) for the cook book and some words about basic astrophysics. :D

I'm a shareware-guy. If I like a computer program I'll buy the product and recommend it to my friends. Same with books.
Gotcha. Here's a good link for StrongFirst's shareware: Weekly strength training articles | StrongFirst (y)
 

Sean M

> 1k Posts
Further thoughts:

Even with a published book (S&S), just look at all the navel-gazing and mental gymnastics that swirled around afterward about what is actually a very straightforward protocol, really just a progression and goal for the old Program Minimum (itself designed as a brief GPP/base building protocol for later strength and conditioning work, e.g. RoP).

When you publish a workout or program/template, you can count on one hand the minutes until someone says “Can I substitute X for Y?” or “I bastardized this program and tried it half-heartedly for a purpose it wasn’t intended for - it sucks!” Or on the other end of the spectrum: “This exercise program even cured my skin rash!”

It would be like giving someone a gun without a training course.

Plus, Q&D is for advanced trainees, so it is more complicated and thus needs a seminar or book to fully explain. S&S can be taught to anyone in an hour, and I have an n=3 (myself included) pool that a man can get working with 24kg and woman with 16kg within just a few weeks.
 

Kozushi

> 3k Posts
Sshhh, don’t give it away!
Just kidding, of course. This is exactly what I mean.
I would feel a stronger connection with an organization that would give away its experimental protocols, and trust that people are willing to pay in order to learn more and develop.
At some point in the testing it might be okay to release some experiments, but if one were to release them all and early, it would just throw out to the public a lot of confusing mumbo-jumbo. Edison didn't publish all the thousands of bulb designs that failed, as far as I know. I just don't see the point of publishing stuff that hasn't been proven.
 

Kozushi

> 3k Posts
Further thoughts:

Even with a published book (S&S), just look at all the navel-gazing and mental gymnastics that swirled around afterward about what is actually a very straightforward protocol, really just a progression and goal for the old Program Minimum (itself designed as a brief GPP/base building protocol for later strength and conditioning work, e.g. RoP).

When you publish a workout or program/template, you can count on one hand the minutes until someone says “Can I substitute X for Y?” or “I bastardized this program and tried it half-heartedly for a purpose it wasn’t intended for - it sucks!” Or on the other end of the spectrum: “This exercise program even cured my skin rash!”

It would be like giving someone a gun without a training course.

Plus, Q&D is for advanced trainees, so it is more complicated and thus needs a seminar or book to fully explain. S&S can be taught to anyone in an hour, and I have an n=3 (myself included) pool that a man can get working with 24kg and woman with 16kg within just a few weeks.
If one already knows how to do swings and TGUs they're on a good path to getting somewhere with S&S. Keeping in mind that S&S is something that is doable with just you and the book, without an instructor to assist it's smart to have the book... and the instructor is going to check back with the book himself I'd think.
 

Sean M

> 1k Posts
If one already knows how to do swings and TGUs they're on a good path to getting somewhere with S&S. Keeping in mind that S&S is something that is doable with just you and the book, without an instructor to assist it's smart to have the book... and the instructor is going to check back with the book himself I'd think.
My point is: S&S is simple enough to learn and do with the book, or someone to show you the swing and getup and tell you the 10x10 and 10x1/1 protocol, treat it as practice, how to gradually add weight, etc.

I think Q&D is in a whole different category, in which the “magic” is missed/lost if you just knew the set/rep scheme and progression. Hence the SE seminar, which apparently is distilled into this book. That would be why the 033 protocol and variants weren’t public: it would be like giving someone LEGO set pieces without the instructions: sure you could make something of the pieces, but the instructions are needed to create what is intended.
 

LightningFast

Double-Digit Post Count
The devil is always in the details. S&S is not just 10X10 L/R swings and 5X2 L/R getups. That's the basic idea but to implement the program you need a lot more information. The book has this information.
S&S is by definition a minimalist program. Minimalist, the least complexity and detail. It is indeed 10x10 and 5x2, no more than that.
 

fractal

More than 500 posts
S&S is by definition a minimalist program. Minimalist, the least complexity and detail. It is indeed 10x10 and 5x2, no more than that.
Respectfully disagree on that. Rate of progression, rest periods, expression of power, "challenge sessions", background, starting points for absolute beginners and more are all important. Many read the book several times through and still get it wrong.
 

Kozushi

> 3k Posts
Respectfully disagree on that. Rate of progression, rest periods, expression of power, "challenge sessions", background, starting points for absolute beginners and more are all important. Many read the book several times through and still get it wrong.
...like me.
 

Alan Mackey

More than 300 posts
Are you, guys, serious? Last time I checked the actual information in S&S book was laid out in five pages.
I agree with this.

Let't take another fine example:

“For the next forty workouts, pick five lifts. Do them every workout. Never miss a rep, in fact, never even get close to struggling. Go as light as you need to go and don’t go over ten reps for any of the movements in a workout. It is going to seem easy. When the weights feel light, simply add more weight.”

And that's it. You do not need anything else to make Easy Strength to work. It really is that simple.

And, yes, the devil is in the details and everyone remotely interested should purchase the book to take a closer look to the finer points of the program. But it's not necessary. Not in the least.

Starting Strength can be summed it up in just two paragraphs. And that's okay.

Yes, you will miss the over-detailed whys and hows, but you don't need to know them to make the program work.

Do this, rest that , eat a lot and repeat it three times a week. Just put the work and magic will happen.

I'm going to purchase the book, but I will never follow a program which can't be summarized in four o five lines. And I'm pretty sure ANY worthy program is susceptible to that. Q&D is not an exception.
 

Olive

Double-Digit Post Count
Is Q&D delayed ? I've orderd it on July 22. But now on amazon, there's "Usually ships within 1 to 2 months."

Q&D summarized in less than 1 line : S&S for TGU haters. :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lee

Sean M

> 1k Posts
From the IG post, the short version appears to be: 12 to 30 minutes of (alternating?) brief/fast rounds of one-arm swings and “power push-ups”. I assume the time range is built-in variability, perhaps a dice roll.
 

Oleg_Nik

Double-Digit Post Count
From Geoff Neupert review
"All from either a simple two-exercise or one exercise program - your choice - performed between 12 and 30 minutes, 2 to 3 times per week."
Hope "one exercise" will be A+A Snatch. Wait for kindle for a while, delivery for Russia is just too long.
 

Sean M

> 1k Posts
@Oleg_Nik That’s a great review by Geoff, it’s great to hear from him again.

Everyone, check out his review on Amazon. There is also one from Mark Reifkind.
 
Top Bottom