S&S efficacy

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

Kozushi

Level 7 Valued Member
And I think, as someone who did some of the Rite of Passage program not long after the book came out (met the press but not quite the snatches), I think that it would have been a lot easier if I had something like the Simple standard under my belt, rather than the comparatively much shorter time on the Program Minimum.
One thing I LOVE about Strong First is that they are not afraid to say they have changed their mind and improved their methods. Some people are afraid to admit that the stuff they said before wasn't as good as it could have been.

Anyhow, S&S does it for me, and I can clean and press quite well anyhow as S&S covers a lot of the same movements and muscles. If I didn't have any heavier weights than 24kg I'd definitely be doing ROP instead of S&S since ROP works with the lighter weight better.
 

pet'

Level 8 Valued Member
Hello,

Each program has its specificities, advantages and drawbacks. It is a matter of goal. Plus, for a precise goal, even if a program works for a person, it does not necesarily work for another.

Indeed maybe so will be more comfortable with bdw, or barbells or even other kb moves with specific rep / set / rest frames.

Anyway, S&S rocks, that is all !

Kind regards,

Pet'
 

Stephen Reynolds

Level 3 Valued Member
...on another note, after seeing who the author of the article is, I believe it's fair to say that Max Shank isn't exactly an impartial source of critique in this case.

He has publicly taken issue with Pavel as a leader and with StrongFirst in general in a podcast with Mike Mahler and Sincere Hogan. He even takes what I would call personal cheap shots at some former high level RKC who's now with StrongFirst. Without naming names he makes it pretty clear who he's talking about (if I can figure it out, it must be obvious because I'm no community insider). I find that very unappealing and unprofessional.

I'm not saying his points in the article should be disregarded, I'm simply saying it's important to consider any bias the author may have when examining any argument.

Precisely why I'm skeptical of Mr. Shank. Professional cheap shots indicate doubt and insecurity in one's philosophy. Not good.
 

Stephen Reynolds

Level 3 Valued Member
One thing I LOVE about Strong First is that they are not afraid to say they have changed their mind and improved their methods. Some people are afraid to admit that the stuff they said before wasn't as good as it could have been.

Anyhow, S&S does it for me, and I can clean and press quite well anyhow as S&S covers a lot of the same movements and muscles. If I didn't have any heavier weights than 24kg I'd definitely be doing ROP instead of S&S since ROP works with the lighter weight better.
Works for me, too.
 

pet'

Level 8 Valued Member
Hello,

Globally, to being impartial, you have to test different programs or methods to compare them. It is not bad in itself to try to understand how things work. However, criticizing without testing before, or without scientific evidence or common sens is not an helpful attitude, IMO

Kind regards,

Pet'
 

Frank_IT

Level 4 Valued Member
I read the article, I've done S&S up to Simple, one GPP single kettlebell complex and I'm currently on the 11th week of my first ever RoP cycle. That's to say that, even though I'm sure to lack most of Mr. Shank knowledge, I can elaborate on his writing based on my personal experience with the program and the comparsion of it with other two.

Is S&S a stand alone effective workout ?.
This is kind of a too general question, I think. S&S is, for a complete beginner, a fantastic program up until Simple to get to a level of GPP so high that it will allow the practicioner to be physically ready (under the strength aspect, at the very least) for many other activities he wants to do next. This is what the program's declared goal is, so, to me, it very well lived up to the expetations, and it's therefore very effective.
Are there other programs that do the same thing? Yes.
Are there better programs that do the same thing? Probably, I don't know for sure... But are they as efficient as S&S, in leaving you enough time to do whatever else you want in your life and play any sport or practice any physical art while in it? Testing everyday (that has been my way of training up until Simple), the overall typical session never took me more than 30 minutes plus a well deserved shower. And I'm not even strong or athletic, just a regular guy.
Does it matter that there could be "better" programs? Given that S&S is a field tested routine that has worked for many, many individuals with different training backgrounds and levels of fitness, I think it's safe to say that no, it does not matter at all.

Is Pavel T. correct in his opinion that S&S is all one needs to build a good foundation?.
In physical training, I can't really argue to something said by anybody that has read 10 or more books, let alone a specialist at Pavel Tsatsouline's level.
In my experience, S&S has turn my life upside down and made it better, that's all I can say. It has also made me think about all the times physically active people told me "you should train, you look horrible and perform accordingly". They were right!

Confused.
Me too! Forever confused! :D

To add to the confusion, I'll tell you that it has always (and still is) my opinion that yes, S&S lacks something, namely a squat (a pure squat) and a press. But, and that is a pretty relevant thing, I've seen that anytime I've added things to it, things changed for the worst. The programs demands just three things: time, consistency and confidence, but it works, it works terribly well!
 

Frank_IT

Level 4 Valued Member
Wonderful! I will write that on a piece of paper and put it onto the wall where I do my S&S lessons!
Now this is rewarding thing to read! :) Thank you, @Tobias Wissmueller, I'm very, very glad! Thanks for that!

How's your training going, my friend? A busy schedule has forced me away from the Forum for a good week now, so I'm trying to catch up. I hope (and most definitely think ;)) you're progressing with Simple & Sinister!
 

Jan

Level 4 Valued Member
I read the article, I've done S&S up to Simple, one GPP single kettlebell complex and I'm currently on the 11th week of my first ever RoP cycle. That's to say that, even though I'm sure to lack most of Mr. Shank knowledge, I can elaborate on his writing based on my personal experience with the program and the comparsion of it with other two.



This is kind of a too general question, I think. S&S is, for a complete beginner, a fantastic program up until Simple to get to a level of GPP so high that it will allow the practicioner to be physically ready (under the strength aspect, at the very least) for many other activities he wants to do next. This is what the program's declared goal is, so, to me, it very well lived up to the expetations, and it's therefore very effective.
Are there other programs that do the same thing? Yes.
Are there better programs that do the same thing? Probably, I don't know for sure... But are they as efficient as S&S, in leaving you enough time to do whatever else you want in your life and play any sport or practice any physical art while in it? Testing everyday (that has been my way of training up until Simple), the overall typical session never took me more than 30 minutes plus a well deserved shower. And I'm not even strong or athletic, just a regular guy.
Does it matter that there could be "better" programs? Given that S&S is a field tested routine that has worked for many, many individuals with different training backgrounds and levels of fitness, I think it's safe to say that no, it does not matter at all.



In physical training, I can't really argue to something said by anybody that has read 10 or more books, let alone a specialist at Pavel Tsatsouline's level.
In my experience, S&S has turn my life upside down and made it better, that's all I can say. It has also made me think about all the times physically active people told me "you should train, you look horrible and perform accordingly". They were right!



Me too! Forever confused! :D

To add to the confusion, I'll tell you that it has always (and still is) my opinion that yes, S&S lacks something, namely a squat (a pure squat) and a press. But, and that is a pretty relevant thing, I've seen that anytime I've added things to it, things changed for the worst. The programs demands just three things: time, consistency and confidence, but it works, it works terribly well!
That is a very inspiring post! Thank you.
 

Kozushi

Level 7 Valued Member
Regarding the squat and press, I see squats happening as part of the TGUs and also presses - floor press at the beginning of the TGUs. TGUs also include lunges, windmills, side planks and other stuff unnamed.
 

Frank_IT

Level 4 Valued Member
Regarding the squat and press, I see squats happening as part of the TGUs and also presses - floor press at the beginning of the TGUs. TGUs also include lunges, windmills, side planks and other stuff unnamed.
The get up, in the words of Master SFG and general physical training beast Fabio Zonin, "includes most of the fundamental movement patterns of the human being", and this is something I'm not gonna question for the same reason as the above post, and also because I believe it's absolutely true. Still, I don't see any squat on the get up. There's a lunge (and a reverse lunge), which is not a squat. I also pointed out that there's not pure squat for that reason. About the floor press, again, it's a very particular type of press with a very limited range of motion. For sure, this will improve something, but it's not nearly enough to progress in pressing, which I think it's something that needs specific programing.

I wouldn't trade the get up for anything else, I love it and I still do it in RoP, but I still think it lacks a press and a squat. The other side of the medal that shines so bright to make me think that this is my favorite exercise, is that in my limited experience, I don't know any other single movement with that many benefits.

I want to point out, again, that from what I've seen there is not a program that will do all and do it well, so it's important to cycle in those or stay in the one that will give more benefits. For the semplicity of it, I think S&S is up there with the best ones.

EDIT: in my post, I was talking about these lacks refering to the program, not a particular movement.
 

North Coast Miller

Level 7 Valued Member
I want to point out, again, that from what I've seen there is not a program that will do all and do it well, so it's important to cycle in those or stay in the one that will give more benefits. For the semplicity of it, I think S&S is up there with the best ones.
I can't add anything to this.
 

ali

Level 6 Valued Member
but I still think it lacks a press and a squat.
maybe not as in the get up of S&S but you can add them, should you wish with an appropriate bell size and in consideration with other stuff.
I do a variety of naked get ups and do a squat when standing. Or a light, 5kg bell, as a czech get up posted here a while back. I'm doing rop at the moment too, hence only light get ups but as a stand alone get up training session with a lighter pressable bell than perhaps your mainstay S&S one, a round of get ups with a squat and a press at standing? Hmmmm, yum, nice......
 

Steve Freides

Staff
Senior Certified Instructor
Elite Certified Instructor
Precisely why I'm skeptical of Mr. Shank. Professional cheap shots indicate doubt and insecurity in one's philosophy. Not good.
@Stephen Reynolds, we have to watch out for the slippery slope here. Calling Max's article a cheap shot is something of a cheap shot itself, in my opinion. Max Shank is a gifted athlete and experienced teacher. We do not need to speak ill of him here or anywhere, even if only to say we don't care for what he says about swings and getups .

Nowhere does Max's article cite S&S by name. There may, in fact, be people doing only swings and getups in a way that isn't as productive as S&S is and, for those people, Max's approach is perhaps, in fact, better. Do we know any of this - who he's addressing, what he's addressing specifically - for sure? No.

IMHO, the best thing we can do is not to get distracted by those we perceive as questioning or putting down what we do - we don't need to read those articles in the first place (I never do, except when they get mentioned here). I mean no disrespect to those interested in discussing this, but doing so doesn't make any of us here stronger or better in any other way, at least in my opinion.

-S-
 

Kozushi

Level 7 Valued Member
The get up, in the words of Master SFG and general physical training beast Fabio Zonin, "includes most of the fundamental movement patterns of the human being", and this is something I'm not gonna question for the same reason as the above post, and also because I believe it's absolutely true. Still, I don't see any squat on the get up. There's a lunge (and a reverse lunge), which is not a squat. I also pointed out that there's not pure squat for that reason. About the floor press, again, it's a very particular type of press with a very limited range of motion. For sure, this will improve something, but it's not nearly enough to progress in pressing, which I think it's something that needs specific programing.

I wouldn't trade the get up for anything else, I love it and I still do it in RoP, but I still think it lacks a press and a squat. The other side of the medal that shines so bright to make me think that this is my favorite exercise, is that in my limited experience, I don't know any other single movement with that many benefits.

I want to point out, again, that from what I've seen there is not a program that will do all and do it well, so it's important to cycle in those or stay in the one that will give more benefits. For the semplicity of it, I think S&S is up there with the best ones.

EDIT: in my post, I was talking about these lacks refering to the program, not a particular movement.
Going from a crouching position to a standing lunge posture is a kind of squat - it’s a squat with one foot in front of the other instead of side to side. No, not a "pure" squat, but the other movements aren’t "pure" textbook style either in the TGU - they’re more like "half" versions of them. including the lunge, side plank, windmill parts of the TGU. Of course this is nothing like squatting several times in a row up and down!
As you accept, there is indeed a floor press in the TGU, but as is obvious, it isn’t the kind of dedicated press that will make you great at floor pressing! Also, pressing only 32 or 40kg from the floor is not particularly impressive (pun not intended actually) if only done once every two minutes 5 times a day. Ah, but, still it’s true that the TGU covers pretty much the same muscles as presses - the upright posture in TGU has you holding the weight overhead like a press, tightening the core muscles needed to keep it up.
Pavel wrote somewhere about not wanting thick thighs that rub into each other while walking and so he doesn’t want to do much or any squatting. Regarding pressing, he points out that while the TGU is not a press per se, you’ll see your pressing ability improve with the TGU as you go up in weight in this exercise due to its activation of similar muscles to pressing.
To cover those exercises also Strong First has the SFG I programme with 6 exercises, and also several other "complexes" and routines that I’ve found looking through the blogs on this website. That stuff looks pretty darn interesting too, but I’ve noticed that when I am careful to do S&S every single day for a few weeks in a row I’m about as toned, strong and fit as I could ever hope to be. I’m almost at the 1 year mark for following Strong First methods and maybe just now I am starting to see for myself my own personal quirks regarding energy levels, weaknesses, and so forth that I am starting to try to intelligently circumvent. All very interesting stuff for sure and well worth the effort!

For myself regarding presses and squats - why would I want to add those onto S&S???
 

PatrickW

Level 6 Valued Member
Rather than theorizing about what a program lacks or doesn't lack, people should find out for themselves. Do S&S for a few months exactly as written. Don't add/subtract anything from it. See what you are lacking after that. That might be different for each person.
 

305pelusa

Level 6 Valued Member
Whoah, it's eye-opening to see that Max and the SF community aren't particularly warm to each other. Shank always seemed to me like one of the strongest in the KB community. Pretty much the only one I remember who could do Front Levers, Handstand Presses, OACUs, etc. At his height and weight, he always seemed like he could walk the talk.

It's a shame business competition can fracture fitness communities this way. I know people like Read, Shank, Maxwell, Cotter always seemed really knowledgeable about their own subjects and had top-notch advice. A lot of these guys were very willing to give out plenty of free advice so really, it ends up damaging the quality of the fitness community overall. Heck, I even feel like it's taboo to even mention those names. Those were the guys I remember really learning from when I was starting out. And Pavel himself of course!
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Top Bottom