S & S Questions - Links

Bauer

Level 6 Valued Member
Not sure if this is in the book. At least I havn´t found it.

S&S is supposed to be done 5-6 times/week. Easy endurance, right? I have two cases below, whitch one is right?

1) Being able to use a heavier weight but less frequently (~3-4 times/week)
2) Using a slightly lighter bell but more frequent (~5-6 times/week)

Does the question makes sense? I can expand on it if its needed.
I think this is a pretty good question. I would say (1) because you want to become strong first.

Then again, this sounds like autoregulated progression. Add a heavier set when you will at least be able to do it 3x per week and stay with it until you able to do it 5-6x per week.
 

Anna C

Level 9 Valued Member
Elite Certified Instructor
Not sure if this is in the book. At least I havn´t found it.

S&S is supposed to be done 5-6 times/week. Easy endurance, right? I have two cases below, whitch one is right?

1) Being able to use a heavier weight but less frequently (~3-4 times/week)
2) Using a slightly lighter bell but more frequent (~5-6 times/week)

Does the question makes sense? I can expand on it if its needed.
I agree, an excellent question.

I would say that usually the standards in the book should differentiate between the two, and if they don't, then it's probably a recovery issue.

What I mean is, everyone should be able to use the heavier weight that you describe in (1), if they can actually meet all the standards described in the book with it. That is the program design for progress, to do this "near daily" as a moderate daily training load.

If you can't do that day after day with that weight, then it could be recovery -- sleep, nutrition, life stress, hormones, or perhaps age as older people don't recover quite as quickly.

If that is the case, I wouldn't suggest moving down to what you describe in (2). I would say address the recovery issues as much as possible, and train as often as possible with the heavier weight, but do a lighter day as an option when needed. Or do as @Bauer suggested and add the heavier sets in as much as you are able to perform and recover from.
 

Bauer

Level 6 Valued Member
@Anna C I think that is a helpful distinction. Personally the same stimulus (say 10x10 with a given weight) will sometimes make me sore and sometimes not. My body/CNS can usually handle the stimulus, but recovery is the bigger issue and bottleneck for me, personally. Therefore I actually use the approach that I advised and aim at 3 full sessions per week; adding as much shorter or lighter sessions as I can on other days. When my lighter sessions catch up with my working sessions that means that I have improved.
 

Stefan Olsson

Level 6 Valued Member
I agree, an excellent question.

I would say that usually the standards in the book should differentiate between the two, and if they don't, then it's probably a recovery issue.

What I mean is, everyone should be able to use the heavier weight that you describe in (1), if they can actually meet all the standards described in the book with it. That is the program design for progress, to do this "near daily" as a moderate daily training load.

If you can't do that day after day with that weight, then it could be recovery -- sleep, nutrition, life stress, hormones, or perhaps age as older people don't recover quite as quickly.

If that is the case, I wouldn't suggest moving down to what you describe in (2). I would say address the recovery issues as much as possible, and train as often as possible with the heavier weight, but do a lighter day as an option when needed. Or do as @Bauer suggested and add the heavier sets in as much as you are able to perform and recover from.
Thank you for the thorough explanation. It makes more sense. Just to make sure I get it clear;

Would you say that weight or frequency is the motor/heart/prime mover of the program? To my understanding from reading the (new) S&S. The answer would be frequency? Of course not with 8kg or 12 kg bells, but if you are able to do 5-6 sessions a week with the 24 for both exercises .. weeks or months down the road when I reach a point where my rest periods are close to 1:1, then and not earlier should I slowly (step loading?) introduce a heavier weight?

In my above example, if done with a 32 my body could only tolerate 3-4 sessions/week. I would lose out on the frequency but I would "gain" in the way that I use a heavier bell and force my body to adopt.


This is probably just asking the same question agin with different words. But as I understand the example with 24 is the "right" way?



@Anna C I think that is a helpful distinction. Personally the same stimulus (say 10x10 with a given weight) will sometimes make me sore and sometimes not. My body/CNS can usually handle the stimulus, but recovery is the bigger issue and bottleneck for me, personally. Therefore I actually use the approach that I advised and aim at 3 full sessions per week; adding as much shorter or lighter sessions as I can on other days. When my lighter sessions catch up with my working sessions that means that I have improved.
Are your body able to adopt the easy endurance by doing it this way or are the "lack" of frequency an issue?
 

Anna C

Level 9 Valued Member
Elite Certified Instructor
Would you say that weight or frequency is the motor/heart/prime mover of the program?
Another excellent question. @Bill Been and I were recently having an offline discussion about that.

Actually, I don't know. I think perhaps both, or it depends on the person. But perhaps it doesn't matter. It's like the rising tide that lifts all ships. If it's your muscles, your strength, your stamina, your cardio, your power, your skill, your grip that is the limiter... just keep doing S&S, it will improve.

But as I understand the example with 24 is the "right" way?
As I understand it, yes, that would be following the program more closely to the guidance. But since there are no S&S police to stop you, if you intuitively feel like using the 32 less often is giving you what you need, I think that's OK too. :)
 

Stefan Olsson

Level 6 Valued Member
Another excellent question. @Bill Been and I were recently having an offline discussion about that.

Actually, I don't know. I think perhaps both, or it depends on the person. But perhaps it doesn't matter. It's like the rising tide that lifts all ships. If it's your muscles, your strength, your stamina, your cardio, your power, your skill, your grip that is the limiter... just keep doing S&S, it will improve.



As I understand it, yes, that would be following the program more closely to the guidance. But since there are no S&S police to stop you, if you intuitively feel like using the 32 less often is giving you what you need, I think that's OK too. :)


Im glad I was able to articulate my thoughts and that you could guide me through it! :)
Thank you!
 

Bauer

Level 6 Valued Member
weeks or months down the road when I reach a point where my rest periods are close to 1:1, then and not earlier should I slowly (step loading?) introduce a heavier weight?
Sounds like you got that idea from S&S 1.0. Please check S&S 2.0, as it is much more explicit on the progression and timeline (2 heavier sets every 4 weeks). Also, no time limit, i. e. the new concept of "Timeless Simple".

Btw: Training for Timeless Simple you are supposed to go down in frequency to 3-4x per week.

Are your body able to adopt the easy endurance by doing it this way or are the "lack" of frequency an issue?
I believe so, yes. Progress might be slower, however. At least as in "how many weeks does is take you to jump up in weight?" and not in "how many sessions does it take you to jump up in weight?".

I have often thought about this. What is more efficient, training 3x per week or 6x per week? Imagine a trainee training 6x per week, being able to jump in weight after 4 weeks and another trainee, training 3x per week and only being able to jump in weigrht after 6 weeks.

Trainee A has progressed after 4 weeks/24 sessions. Trainee B has progressed after 6 weeks/18 sessions. This is just hypothetical, but you get the point. If this illustration holds true it would be a matter of priorities.
 

Stefan Olsson

Level 6 Valued Member
Sounds like you got that idea from S&S 1.0. Please check S&S 2.0, as it is much more explicit on the progression and timeline (2 heavier sets every 4 weeks). Also, no time limit, i. e. the new concept of "Timeless Simple".

Btw: Training for Timeless Simple you are supposed to go down in frequency to 3-4x per week.



I believe so, yes. Progress might be slower, however. At least as in "how many weeks does is take you to jump up in weight?" and not in "how many sessions does it take you to jump up in weight?".

I have often thought about this. What is more efficient, training 3x per week or 6x per week? Imagine a trainee training 6x per week, being able to jump in weight after 4 weeks and another trainee, training 3x per week and only being able to jump in weigrht after 6 weeks.

Trainee A has progressed after 4 weeks/24 sessions. Trainee B has progressed after 6 weeks/18 sessions. This is just hypothetical, but you get the point. If this illustration holds true it would be a matter of priorities.
Thank you Bauer!
Wise words.

can you link to the page in S&S where it says 3-4 days when pursuing simple?
 

Bauer

Level 6 Valued Member
Thank you @Stefan Olsson
From S&S 2.0 (revised and updated):, chapter "ADVANCE TO “GO,” COLLECT $200"
Once you own Timeless Simple, the schedule mutates slightly to fit your greater power and strength.


Cut the training frequency back from nearly daily to three to four times a week
I only have the Kindle version.

...

And to respond to my own train of thought: Most S&S follower report to be training 4-5 times per week. Maybe sometimes 6 but in other weeks only 3 times. With the 4-week step cycle from S&S 2.0 this would mean an average of 18 session per cycle, varying from 12 to 24 sessions, with 16-20 being the more likely range. So maybe 18 sessions is a good benchmark for going up in weight, especially when you are not able to train as much as you would like.
 

Arash Mohammady

Level 1 Valued Member
Is it bad to miss 3 days (in a row) of simple and sinister practice? I’m asking because I’ve been very busy lately and couldn’t fit in the time because of work and family gatherings.
 

offwidth

Level 9 Valued Member
Is it bad to miss 3 days (in a row) of simple and sinister practice? I’m asking because I’ve been very busy lately and couldn’t fit in the time because of work and family gatherings.
Missing days in a row is not a problem until you start to make a habit of it. Remember S&S is a long term affair. Come back a year from now and see if these 3 days you missed make a difference. I can tell you they will not.

However like I said if you miss 3 or 4 days in a row every week or so, it will make a difference; not that it's 'bad', it's just that you won't progress like you could have otherwise.
 

Arash Mohammady

Level 1 Valued Member
Missing days in a row is not a problem until you start to make a habit of it. Remember S&S is a long term affair. Come back a year from now and see if these 3 days you missed make a difference. I can tell you they will not.

However like I said if you miss 3 or 4 days in a row every week or so, it will make a difference; not that it's 'bad', it's just that you won't progress like you could have otherwise.
Thank you for the response!
 

Kozushi

Level 7 Valued Member
Thank you for the thorough explanation. It makes more sense. Just to make sure I get it clear;

Would you say that weight or frequency is the motor/heart/prime mover of the program? To my understanding from reading the (new) S&S. The answer would be frequency? Of course not with 8kg or 12 kg bells, but if you are able to do 5-6 sessions a week with the 24 for both exercises .. weeks or months down the road when I reach a point where my rest periods are close to 1:1, then and not earlier should I slowly (step loading?) introduce a heavier weight?

In my above example, if done with a 32 my body could only tolerate 3-4 sessions/week. I would lose out on the frequency but I would "gain" in the way that I use a heavier bell and force my body to adopt.


This is probably just asking the same question agin with different words. But as I understand the example with 24 is the "right" way?





Are your body able to adopt the easy endurance by doing it this way or are the "lack" of frequency an issue?
There are people more qualified than me here but I've been an S&Ser since early 2016 and I use my S&S strength on the mats. From my vantage point, being stronger is more important. We are lifting weights after all. Thus, heavier weight is to be preferred even if it means less frequent training. This is balanced by the "cardio" (the application of the term can could be controversial, so I'm talking about strnegth-endurance here specifically) development we're training for with the swings. If you only do 2 sessions a week I think you'd want more heart-pumping training to complement the program - in my case of course the on-mat training handles this need fine. So, I'd think that if you're only or mainly just doing S&S you'd want to do it at least 4 times a week in general, preferably with the heavier weight over 6 times a week at a lighter weight, but if you're busy training for a sport too or similar, then you'll have to scale it back.

Again, I am not pro nor expert, just a devotee with a point of view.
 

Anth

Level 4 Valued Member
Hello,

I have a question about S&S 2.0:

I have achieved "timeless simple" with the 32. I can do it twice a week comfortably, but any more than that, and I get burned out. This makes it very difficult to practice for the "simple challenge." I ran one "simple challenge" practice last week and it messed me up a bit. I was really sore. I was wondering if anyone has tried doing S&S twice a week, with the simple challenge twice a month. So, essentially, replacing a timeless simple with a simple challenge twice a month, while only practicing S&S twice weekly every week (sorry if this seems confusing).

I think I need more recovery time. I think two heavy/hard workouts per week is my sweet spot.

I do Muay Thai and bodyweight workouts on two other days. So twice weekly S&S, twice weekly Muay Thai and bodyweight (bodyweight workouts really help my soreness I've found. I do animal flow/BJJ style workouts).

Thanks!
 

Kozushi

Level 7 Valued Member
Hello,

I have a question about S&S 2.0:

I have achieved "timeless simple" with the 32. I can do it twice a week comfortably, but any more than that, and I get burned out. This makes it very difficult to practice for the "simple challenge." I ran one "simple challenge" practice last week and it messed me up a bit. I was really sore. I was wondering if anyone has tried doing S&S twice a week, with the simple challenge twice a month. So, essentially, replacing a timeless simple with a simple challenge twice a month, while only practicing S&S twice weekly every week (sorry if this seems confusing).

I think I need more recovery time. I think two heavy/hard workouts per week is my sweet spot.

I do Muay Thai and bodyweight workouts on two other days. So twice weekly S&S, twice weekly Muay Thai and bodyweight (bodyweight workouts really help my soreness I've found. I do animal flow/BJJ style workouts).

Thanks!
I'm not familiar with the 2.0 book but in the old book at least twice a week is fine if you're active in other ways playing sports, lifting other weights etc.
 

Steve Freides

Staff
Senior Certified Instructor
Elite Certified Instructor
@Anth, to quote Rob Lawrence, if everything's a priority, nothing's a priority. Consider, if you wish to take a run at a tougher S&S goal, cutting back on some other things. That doesn't mean cutting back on them forever, but it might mean that you try it for six months and see if you can achieve your stated S&S goal.

-S-
 

Arash Mohammady

Level 1 Valued Member
Hello comrades, I have a question about training later in the day around 8-10 pm, because somedays my work takes up my entire day and I have no time to train in the mornings or evenings. Is it still healthy to train S&S that late?
 

blake

First Post
I have a S/S question I'm not sure if I'm in the right thread. I was wondering when trying to get 10 sets of swings with each arm in the 5 minutes if it's possible to do multiple sets in a row to finish in the 5 mins. Thank you for any help

Nick
I want to confirm that under S&S your goal is to do 10 sets of 10 swings total in a session. So if you are alternating arms that would add up to 50 swings with your non-dominant arm total and 50 swings with your dominant arm total. This may be redundant but in case you're trying to do 100 swings with each arm in 5 minutes (200 total swings) I wanted to mention this.
 
Top Bottom