seeking informed criticism of StrongFirst

Kozushi

Level 7 Valued Member
I would characterize it as:
  • Pavel did not invent ladders, but RoP features them (obviously), and they continue to be used in SF programs such as those in blog posts (Total Package Training Plan, Dry Fighting Weight, Total Tension and Moving Target Complexes, and Fighter Pull-up Program come to mind), SFL manual, etc.
  • Thinking on ballistics has evolved; high-rep sets of swings and snatches for time are now de-emphasized in favor of anti-glycolytic/A+A style
So while it’s not SF, the principles behind why RoP works pre-date and out-live the author/organization that arranged the phenomenon into a marketable product.
I don't know what A+A is. Internet and this site searches aren't getting me anywhere.
What is the current thinking on ballistics?
 

Sean M

Level 6 Valued Member
I don't know what A+A is. Internet and this site searches aren't getting me anywhere.
What is the current thinking on ballistics?
Alactic + Aerobic. Heavy, short duration, long rest, many repeats. See the “Long Rests” article from Pavel.
 

Nate

Level 5 Valued Member

Kozushi

Level 7 Valued Member
Your S&S intervals that have you burning out your ATP quickly with big powerful swings then resting long enough to repeat with full power. As opposed to doing it all as fast as you can & being a big sweaty panting mess feeling the burn of glycolysis.

Understanding Why "Less Is More" with Anti-Glycolytic Training | StrongFirst
This is how I always did them and still do them. I've gotten the swings with the 32 down to 6 minutes before, but just as the A+A goes and I think the book says too, I prefer 100% effort with larger rests than crummy form half-swings quicker.
 

North Coast Miller

Level 7 Valued Member
Alactic + Aerobic. Heavy, short duration, long rest, many repeats. See the “Long Rests” article from Pavel.
While this wouldn't be a critique of SF training method, one criticism might be re all the doctrine behind A&A. There is plenty of evidence from training styles using similar loading/pacing strategies that it is a good approach for strength training, there exists pretty much zero research bearing out any of the metabolic theory behind it.

Further, what research there is demonstrates a lot of the positive metabolic aspects of exercise come from signaling generated by glycolytic end products.
 

Steve Freides

Staff
Senior Certified Instructor
Elite Certified Instructor
@North Coast Miller, I don't believe what you've said is accurate. I am not a scientist, but I feel pretty confident there is evidence to support A+A as a lower-cost way to achieve the same ends as can be achieved through a primarily glycolytic pathway, provided the latter pathway is introduced towards the end of a training period in preparation for an event that requires it. And for those who don't compete, using a more glycolytic approach every now and then, e.g., once every 2-4 weeks, seems to suffice.

@Al Ciampa?

-S-
 

North Coast Miller

Level 7 Valued Member
I certainly don't have all the nitty gritty on this topic, or what levels of ROS are needed to achieve positive effects across the board.

From an analytical standpoint, the gains from working with higher loads (tension) really cannot be stimulated any other way. I'm not at all convinced you can get the same adaptive response training primarily glycolytic, so we're talking about different training goals anyway.

What I'm saying is that the SF approach works for what it does, not for what it avoids.

Antioxidants prevent health-promoting effects of physical exercise in humans

Antioxidants prevent health-promoting effects of physical exercise in humans
 

North Coast Miller

Level 7 Valued Member
@ Sean M,
All good, this thread is more of a thought experiment in my opinion than any sort of real critique.

Enough people over the years have gotten good results that the worst anyone can say is "it might not be for you, but it has a good track record". That's not really a criticism.
 

Kozushi

Level 7 Valued Member
I think Strong First needs a "more complete" bodyweight programme. Pavel loves pullups, so how about an expanded Naked Warrior concept including all the moves in the SFG? Like I wrote above there are safety concerns to yourself, others and your home regarding the use of kettlebells and barbells indoors that might convince some to prefer bodyweight only at home. Naked warrior is great but there are more things one can do with the body with minimal equipment at home, including a bar. Lots of good stuff well worth doing.
 

Anna C

Level 9 Valued Member
Elite Certified Instructor
how about an expanded Naked Warrior concept including all the moves in the SFG
I assume you mean in the SFB, and I think that's an excellent idea!

One comprehensive program that includes OAPU, pistol squats, HLR, handstand push-up, and pull-ups. That would be great. "The Complete StrongFirst Bodyweight Strength Program". Maybe there's one out there already in articles? And I'll have to check my SFB manual again, but I don't recall a comprehensive program that includes them all together.
 

Nate

Level 5 Valued Member
@North Coast Miller, I don't believe what you've said is accurate. I am not a scientist, but I feel pretty confident there is evidence to support A+A as a lower-cost way to achieve the same ends as can be achieved through a primarily glycolytic pathway, provided the latter pathway is introduced towards the end of a training period in preparation for an event that requires it. And for those who don't compete, using a more glycolytic approach every now and then, e.g., once every 2-4 weeks, seems to suffice.

@Al Ciampa?

-S-
I did a research study that found 100% of A+A was enjoyed and adhered to while 100% of glycolytic work motivated a change to knitting while watching TV on the couch.
Sample size was 1.

(In other words, I enjoy A+A and hate grueling glycolytic work)
 
Last edited:

Al Ciampa

Level 7 Valued Member
Certified Instructor
@North Coast Miller, I don't believe what you've said is accurate. I am not a scientist, but I feel pretty confident there is evidence to support A+A as a lower-cost way to achieve the same ends as can be achieved through a primarily glycolytic pathway, provided the latter pathway is introduced towards the end of a training period in preparation for an event that requires it. And for those who don't compete, using a more glycolytic approach every now and then, e.g., once every 2-4 weeks, seems to suffice.

@Al Ciampa?

-S-
I don’t want to play
 

JamesPTA

Level 5 Valued Member
+1 to @alciampa

There’s going to be informed criticism everywhere you go. Everyone is going to use research to prove their point because there is so much research out there that you can disprove just about anything.

My one downfall is not being certified by StrongFirst, but I am living proof, along with countless others that I hear and read about, that their methods work. Effectively at that.

Did you know you can find research articles that that talk about the ineffectiveness of physical therapy and as well as a sound strength and conditioning program?

A+A works. ROP and S&S work. Physical therapy works. Plyometrics work. Sports nutrition works. Take your goals and apply efficiently and it will work.
 

Kozushi

Level 7 Valued Member
I assume you mean in the SFB, and I think that's an excellent idea!

One comprehensive program that includes OAPU, pistol squats, HLR, handstand push-up, and pull-ups. That would be great. "The Complete StrongFirst Bodyweight Strength Program". Maybe there's one out there already in articles? And I'll have to check my SFB manual again, but I don't recall a comprehensive program that includes them all together.
I'd have to assume it's a GTG concept, which is how I approach my bodyweight training as explained in Naked Warrior. Even just on this site some article laying out the "Party Endorsed Body Weight Moves" to master, and then perhaps some progressions would be great.

Like I've repeated here a few times, there are legitimate reasons why some people at some times would not want to swing heavy kettlebells or lift heavy barbells in their own home. This is where the convenience and relative safety of bodyweight training comes into play. It also can do some things that cannot be done with weights, as we all know. There could be both minimalist and less minimalist variations. For instance, I've shelled out the bit of cash needed to buy parallettes (around 50$), gymnastics rings (12$), pushup handles (I forget but quite cheap), dipping bars. These all satisfy the parameter of not loading on external weight, but use a bit of equipment - not a bad thing at all! Nothin' wrong with L-sits on the parallettes or bodyweight rows and dips on the gymnastics rings hanging from my chinup bar. So, I'm no longer a "Naked" Warrior, but I'm still a lightly armed Warrior, at least.
 
Top Bottom