Harald, it was reading an earlier post of yours that I began switching over to breath control having not really understood it properly before, or thought about it. Like you, I missed the connection. I posted earlier in this thread that the breathing switches the focus entirely and it does make a difference but it is out of my descriptive abilities to articulate that difference, just that it is there, it is what it is.
A fantastic thread on this fantastic forum, thank you all.
Thanks to all who contributed to this thread. I think that people tend to see what they are familiar with and miss the things that they are unfamiliar with. Much of what was learned in this thread may have been in S&S, but maybe missed by some of us. There is so much more to S&S than what at first meets the eye.
Pavel is not just (in my humble opinion) one of, it not the, best strength experts in the field, but also a truly gifted author. I've read all his books. Hell, if he wrote down instructions for installing a washing machine I'd probably read it. S&S the book partakes of the spirit of the program - almost Zen like in it's simplicity and focus and as postnspread writes the reader should pay attention to what is not said and be cautious when adding what's not prescribed. Cracking thread. Cracking forum.
Interesting and helpful thread, thanks to all involved. I have to say I'm with Pnigro on this - and I fully understood all of Al's and Pavel's points while reading the book (and I believe my reading level is above a 4th grader).
There are two good questions ( the concept of the goal and reaching it v owning it, and if the training has a linear conclusion at the goal) and I admire Pnigro for having the courage to ask them at the risk of looking like a novice - there are goals stated and guidelines for reaching the goals in SS - yet it is not illogical to believe that, as Pnigro has said "which led me to believe that the training itself was supposed to reach that point."
Plus, these are goals which I would believe, being like an aerobic fitness, you could assume (perhaps incorrectly but nevertheless, and assume innocently) that this goal should be repeatable more often than not, if not daily. Not as a "test". One could even debate "owning it" could mean daily.
Pavel's response is brilliant (above) and respectful, and answers the discussion nicely. Yet I admit I would love to chat in person with him (or other's more experienced) where a simple concept like he mentions would be part of a conversation while you're just hanging out in the gym. That's how knowledge like that is passed on. Yet in the book - due to the it being a book - makes it harder to perhaps convey these nuances.
I admit myself - if I was to reach the goal of doing something in a certain time (aerobic-esque fitness) I would expect to be able to do it daily. To me there is a difference (and I can be wrong of course) - between weight and aerobic. I have a certain rep max - which can change, but as well I don't lift it daily once I reach it. It is not physically possible, CNS etc, and understanding cycling etc means you understand this concept. Yet coming from lifting and thinking with that mindset to an aerobic + weigh goal, where the weight still operates under the same understanding and physiology but for me - aerobically I don't - can lead to questions like Pnigro asked.
Over the past months I have been on a deload program of my own making, where I have been doing SS daily and in the time frame too (actually less than 5 for both) daily with a light-ish bell. I even asked on the blog once if that is what is meant (doing SS daily - does that mean doing a 32 in the time frame daily, or just some variation).
So I don't believe it is naïve question or shows a lack of reading ability. Thanks Al and Pavel for your patience and replies.
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)