all posts post new thread

Other/Mixed What is GPP? Does it really exist?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 5559
  • Start date
Other strength modalities (e.g., Clubs), mixed strength modalities (e.g., combined kettlebell and barbell), other goals (flexibility)
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)

Deleted member 5559

Guest
I have been migrating my thinking away from the existence of GPP for myself over the last few months. Perhaps it is a matter of semantics but I want to tease out my thoughts a little more to refine and organize them. I have been pursuing what I consider general programs for the last few years and have never felt so ill prepared before. In theory, I've thought a GPP program should be a jumping off point for any sport specific endeavor. However, the tasks I've been pursuing recently have not aligned well and I feel further behind of a jumping off point than I would have thought.

This occurrence has made me really consider what a GPP program actually is if it even exists and what it looks like for me. I'm going to repeat that part - what it looks like for me. I believe the tasks I need to be prepared for are different than anyone else and my training should reflect that making all my training specific to me. In that case what is GPP for me? Is GPP the same for a farmer as a triathlete when they have to be prepared for pretty different tasks? What is similar between everyone that it can even be considered general? Does GPP exist?

I like the park and bus bench concept a lot and is where I begin to consider that GPP for me is simply the park bench in the park near where I need to go. In this case, the park I'm at is still specific to me. Is GPP the grand central that a person would need to get on one bus to get there before they can get on the bus that takes them where they need to go? Would it be better to be sitting in the park across the street from where you eventually want to be. Does sitting at Grand Central only make sense if you don't know where you need to go?

To be at a job interview at noon (spontaneous or planned), what does that journey look like?
  1. Sit at grand central and take the bus(es) directly to the interview. (Rushed/Risky?)
  2. Sit at a park across the street all morning and then walk over and sit in the lobby until it's interview time. (Calming/Time Consuming?)
  3. Sit at a park somewhere in town, take bus(es) to grand central, then take another bus(es) to the interview. (Exhausting/Really Risky?)
  4. Only interview at places near the park you're sitting. (Limiting?)
Is it better to know where you want to work, develop your specific resume, and then wait for an opening or is better to have a good resume and apply where/when necessary to jobs that align to the resume? Both end with a job that pays the bills right?

$0.01 for you thoughts?
 
To me, GPP means I can dial in on a new program or start a new physical endeavor, do whatever I need to do at work and my condition won't be a handicap. I can go for a hike and if I have to lug 80lbs I can do it for a bunch of miles, or canoe solo into the wind for a few miles. It doesn't mean I can lug those 80lbs over all manner of elevation changes while short on water, or paddle that canoe indefinitely.

I don't expect to be a powerhouse at everything, to me GPP is a baseline for further work and a holding line for previously acquired skills and abilities. Implicit in that is some of those previous skills are going to degrade a bit, and I will be at the low end of the bell curve when I start that new endeavor.

I see what you're getting at though, the greater your routine demands, the higher level of fitness you will need to maintain as "GPP". Or you accept that at any given point in time you won't be at your best across an entire spectrum and you might not be happy with your performance in a given aspect. But...how is it across a broader field?
 
A lot of stuff along these lines on the forum these past few days @Bro Mo
Thought provoking to be sure. I'm glad you brought this one up, because I think about this as well, and have always gone a bit back and forth on my views.

As some people around here have realized I am usually a proponent of the Gym Jones mindset of training being preparation for the real thing.
I suppose that's the crux of it for me. Just what is the real thing?

Again, as many know here, I climb (at one time reasonably seriously), race bikes, do adventure races, OCR's, and dabble in martial arts. So I have always looked at GPP as training in preparation for training. In other words I have always wanted to be ready to drop into a serious training plan at a relative 'moments notice'

If a mate rang up and said how would you like to go climb the East Ridge of Mt. Logan (or pick any climb) in two months time... could I launch into real training and be prepared in time without getting injured in the process. Now 'any climb' is a bit open ended, but hence the G in GPP.
(a bit similar to what I see @North Coast Miller just posted as I am writing this)

Now since I have a lot of varied interests the so called GPP needs to be fairly wide, although not necessarily deep.

My dilemma in my worldview is that sometimes I don't think of training just for the sake of training as being the 'real thing'. But why couldn't it be?

Plenty of people are content to train 'just because' or for vague and/or random reasons. And that's totally cool. To me however that is not in my personal perspective of GPP...

I am not sure I addressed the question adequately, or was able to articulate my thoughts properly.

Enough rambling... I think I'll go knock out a couple more pull-ups while the sun is still shining...

Great thread concept
 
You can't do everything at once. You need to maintain an acceptable level of strength and conditioning for your needs. You need to maintain your core lifts and/or movements, and do some steady state cardio a few times a week. When I try to get too specific or do too much a lot gets lost.

Again you can't do it all. Something has to give. Zeroing in on your basic needs that you can build on when required is essential. If you have a lot of resources to invest getting good at a lot just take work, but most don't have the resources. I am trying to streamline my training because it is easy for me to get carried away.

I don't think S&S is GPP. To me it is very specific. It's a KB Swing and TGU skill program. Especially if you are going for Sinister.

The best program is always the one you are not doing.
 
I have been pursuing what I consider general programs for the last few years and have never felt so ill prepared before. In theory, I've thought a GPP program should be a jumping off point for any sport specific endeavor. However, the tasks I've been pursuing recently have not aligned well and I feel further behind of a jumping off point than I would have thought.

Well, the bolded terms might be a source of the problem. GPP lays the groundwork for SPP (specific physical preparedness). So that's what the term GENERAL refers to -- it's in contrast to SPP, and addresses more general physical capabilities, but it has to be targeted toward YOUR SPP needs. It isn't a jumping off point for ANY sport specific endeavor; it's a jumping off point for YOUR sport specific endeavor.

So GPP can't refer to any particular style of training, exercises, or whatever, in isolation. It's ony GPP in the context of your SPP. If the things you have been doing have not aligned well with your specific needs, then it isn't the RIGHT GPP.

For instance, the bench press is SPP for a powerlifter, but good GPP for a lineman in American football. But if the lineman is a college player preparing for the NFL scouting combine, then it becomes SPP, since that is a specific test at the combine. But the combine test is max reps with 225lbs, so a program to increase bench press 1RM is more GPP for that test. For a marathoner, the bench press would not be good GPP or SPP.

A lot of confusion comes in because many people don't have a need for SPP, so the term GPP almost doesn't even apply, even though it seems like it should (I misuse it myself in this way on many occasions).

Most people have general NEEDS, but don't need general TRAINING (what could be more specific than a program with TWO exercises). This is Dan John's quadrant 3. If you are in quadrant 2 (varsity/professional level team/contact/collision sports) or 4 (elite level specialized contests, such as powerlifting, track and field events, distance running, etc.), the concept of GPP is more relevant, since the concept of SPP is more relevant.

Plenty of people are content to train 'just because' or for vague and/or random reasons. And that's totally cool. To me however that is not in my personal perspective of GPP...

+1.

$0.01 for you thoughts?

PM me and I'll tell you where to send it ;-).
 
This is a really good question. Worth pondering. ALL training is specific to some degree. There is some crossover in adaptive benefits but specificity always prevails. GPP is simply getting a broad based (but thin) spread of specific adaptations. From that perspective, it makes sense to bias your GPP towards your specific needs. I think you stated this idea nicely.
 
I think the idea that GPP prepares you to specialize has been overplayed. GPP (broad, but shallow specialization) prepares you to specialize when your sport requires broad but shallow specialization. When the specialization is narrow but deep, not so much. Consider a 40K time trialist (bicycling). GPP is likely to do little for this individual other than waste time and recovery energy he could be putting into bike training. On the other hand, a soccer player is more likely to benefit from GPP. All training produces specific adaptations to imposed demands. If an athlete does not need those specific adaptations, it could be wasteful at best, and counterproductive at worst.
 
I made awesome, specific, gains in my power lifting training last year (over a period of about 5 months). My bench, squat, and deadlift really increased a lot (relative, for me).

However, this came at a minor cost of other more general strength, conditioning, and health metrics. And I could feel the difference, it was real. Not to mention that my power lifting training was hard. Its not something that I want to continue, without a break. So now I am doing a program to improve my strength, conditioning, and health. A program that is park bench and doesn't beat me up. This is GPP to me. But I still have goals while on GPP. It is just that my goals are more qualitative, less quantitative. I have already made great progress in the last month. I am in much better shape now than I was 4-6 weeks ago.

But you know what? 3, 4, 5 or more months from now, I'm going g to be hungry and feel like pushing myself again. At that point I will start power lifting again. And I will make great improvements in those 3 lifts, I am 100% certain of this.

And then I will eventually need a break and the cycle continues... I find that this contrasting type of training works well for me (introducing seasons into your yearly workout plan). Maybe it would work well for you? For example, I believe Tommy Kono, the famous Olympic lifter, alternated between weightlifting (gold medals) and was also a successful bodybuilder. Maybe bodybuilding was his GPP?
 
Perhaps, if you were to list out the set of physical attributes that you really value, the ideal GPP would be the one that jointly maximizes all of them together. Of course, none of the attributes is individually optimized by a GPP - instead it's some cost function across them all.

Which means that even a GPP really has to be customized to the person - someone who puts a lot of value on maintaining a sub-40-minute 10k may not be so interested in throwing kettlebells around.

The classic question: what does "strong" mean? Can't define a GPP without being able to answer that, I think.
 
It looks like many think that GPP has to be customized to a specific individual and his specific needs, like of sport. I don't think it can be called "general" anymore then.

If I think of GPP, it basically comes down to being able to take care of anything that life throws at me. When I think of the most common situation, I have to be able to carry heavy things, whether it's groceries, furniture or children. When I think of when it comes to the worst, I'd have to be able to carry my wounded squad mate away from the front line. And there's a lot in between. I think some of it has to be injury prevention, like developing a strong midsection to ensure a healthy back for a lifetime.

I think something like Easy Strength done with Dan John's foundational human movements and maybe a bit extra comes closest to the ideal I have. Take the three big powerlifts, add KB swings and TGUs, and loaded carries, and you're doing very well. Coincidentally, that is largely my long term training plan, which I hadn't thought of in this context before.
 
So GPP can't refer to any particular style of training, exercises, or whatever, in isolation. It's ony GPP in the context of your SPP. If the things you have been doing have not aligned well with your specific needs, then it isn't the RIGHT GPP.
Indeed. I do squats and deadlift. They are GPP for me. They get me stronger and support my other activities, but I could do something else with similar benefits.
For a powerlifter, they are SPP. He has to squat, bench and deadlift.

We need the context to define GPP and SPP.
 
Definitely this conversation needs more context.

To me, GPP is a steady diet of hinge, squat, push, pull and maybe some crawling or running, all in roughly equal measure. Maxwell's five pillars, and an approach common to how many good coaches approach GPP.

I add in some extra lactate threshold work, but is mostly a result of pacing and not of major differences in my exercise selection.
 
I don't think GPP has anything to do with your sport/SPP other than maybe provide a base for your SPP.
As soon as you start moving your GPP training in a direction that's more in line with your SPP, it's not GPP anymore and becomes SPP.
Like @Antti said it's "general" and should prepare you for a huge variety of things that life could throw at you and shouldn't just be viewed as a starting point for SPP.

GPP to me is what Crossfit tried to achieve at its beginning - a good base of key qualities (strength, endurance, flexibility, speed, power, agility, balance, accuracy, coordination, stamina).

To be at a job interview at noon (spontaneous or planned), what does that journey look like?
Your mistake lies in the words I put in bold.
To use your GPP/SPP & park/bus bench example, "spontaneous" would be GPP and "planned" SPP.
Why?
Because for a planned job interview you know the time and place. That's very specific.
For a spontaneous interview you don't know where and when (maybe even if) it happens. That's very general.
For the planned interview you can search for the best and fastest way beforehand and pick an appropriate bus station.
To be best prepared for the spontaneous interview you need to go to grand central, because it's the base for all the busses and trains and gives you the most options in case that phone rings and you need to go to an interview.
For some interviews grand central won't be the best starting point, but statistically it will be the best.
 
Last edited:
To me, GPP for the general population is being able to move without restriction, and carry out every day useful tasks successfully. So carrying groceries, helping a friend move, hauling yard waste, even just climbing stairs or walking in from the parking lot without sucking wind.

As a former couch potato, S&S more than delivered on GPP for me. I do not have a specific sport or activity, so I can’t speak to how well S&S 2-3 sessions a week delivers as GPP for that sport/activity, but it is certainly a high return on time/energy invested for getting an untrained person generally strong (stronger than average - compared to couch potatoes or even cardio bunnies - and “strong enough” for daily activities and as a base for further strength work).
 
Regardless of what the actual definition is, I believe GPP to be "what can I do that will set a foundation for a more specific task?"
In this sense, does my training give me a foundation to be reasonably proficient in many areas (aerobic, anaerobic, power, strength, endurance) and move into specific preparation for a more focused aspect of fitness.

S&S would likely hit this box for me.... Anaerobic? Check. Aerobic base improved? Check. Power? Check. Strength? Check. Endurance? Check. This list of qualities is obviously not exhaustive, however by doing S&S, if I choose to specify in any of those qualities, I am well prepared to do so.
 
Keep in mind - Do 5 sprints, 2x5 on Hinge Squat Push Pull, add in a Loaded Carry, this is maybe equally categorized as GPP
 
Wow! There is a lot of diversity in the responses to this discussion. I really appreciate everyone's perspective.
do whatever I need to do at work and my condition won't be a handicap
Interesting to consider the risk of not being at a bus station at all and the implications of that.
When I try to get too specific or do too much a lot gets lost.
Similarly, this sounds like avoiding the risks of being too specific or to broad. I heard an analogy once on multi-tasking that I liked. It was plate spinning in a circus act. If you try to spin all the plates at the same time they will all fall. One should be able to spin a plate hard, then the next and so on and once they are all spinning, come back to each and give it a boost. If you have too many plates, they will start to fall before you get back to it.
It's ony GPP in the context of your SPP.
Does this imply there is a third physical preparedness? Do you feel anything is even more general than the GPP related to SPP?
If an athlete does not need those specific adaptations, it could be wasteful at best, and counterproductive at worst.
Another view at avoiding risks rather than rewards. From a biology perspective, can you elaborate more on a list of adaptations and possibly categorize them? As @Kettlebelephant stated, I feel this is something that crossfit did with their pyramid of 10 attributes.
the ideal GPP would be the one that jointly maximizes all of them together.
Physical attributes, movement patterns, skills - can you expand this thought a little more?
When I think of the most common situation, I have to be able to carry heavy things, whether it's groceries, furniture or children.
Ah yes, the sport of DAD!
We need the context to define GPP and SPP.
This is somewhat the point, is it GPP if it requires context?
For some interviews grand central won't be the best starting point, but statistically it will be the best
As an analyst I appreciate the language of statistics. Can you elaborate a little more on how you go about aligning your statistical needs with your statistical programming?
 
Not knowing much about GPP, I started googling and found this article on T-Nation which describes it in a way that makes sense to me. Especially the following which I quoted from the article:

Louie is saying that if you want to be big and strong, you have to do more than just bench, squat, and deadlift. You're going to have weaknesses, and having a general level of fitness and movement quality will help make overcoming your weaknesses much easier.

Let's suppose that you play rugby. Any training that you do that isn't rugby specific (skill work and actually playing the game) is technically GPP. Getting stronger could potentially make you a better rugby player, but it isn't a direct application of skill.

To summarize, for lifter or athlete alike, GPP is general training that improves your specific training by limiting your weaknesses, improving your quality of movement, and enhancing your body's ability to handle greater workloads.
 
I'll have another GPP/SPP example for you. School and college/university.
Everyone needs to attend school to achieve a very wide base of knowledge (-> GPP). Then you go to college/university to receive a specialized education that is needed for the field of work you chose (-> SPP).
For a lot of the stuff you learn at college it's good to have your knowledge from school, because it further builds on that knowledge (e.g. math), but there are also things that are totally unrelated to the knowledge from school.
Ideally you keep the knowledge from school even though you learn a lot of new job-specific stuff. For example even if you choose a job in writing where most likely you don't need to do math or know about history, you should still be able to do the math stuff from school or know about the things you learned in history class.
It's the same for GPP and SPP.
Ideally you keep the level you had before you ventured into SPP. That's why e.g. Louie Simmons has his athletes do conditioning with prowlers and stuff like that. To keep them at a healthy conditioning level. It's not SPP, because it most likely doesn't do anything to improve their competition lifts, but it maintains their ability to walk a flight of stairs without dying which is a quality that most people would consider as being "generaly prepared".

As an analyst I appreciate the language of statistics. Can you elaborate a little more on how you go about aligning your statistical needs with your statistical programming?
I don't know if I understand your question the right way :) but let me try nonetheless.
There are things every human being needs to be prepared for, e.g. walking while holding your croceries. Then there are things that are rare, but still common like pushing your broken down car. And then there are things you probably will never encounter like fighting a tiger.
Statistically walking with your groceries is something you'll encounter 100%, so that's something you need to be prepared for. The chances of fighting a tiger are <0,1%, so no need to spend time preparing for that.
I can't give you an exact number, but you'll probably want to be prepared for everything that statistically you are likely to encounter.
Just to give an example with an exercise.
The barbell snatch alone builds a good amount of the key qualities I mentioned earlier (the Crossfit ones).
It will build strength, power, speed, coordination, flexibility and balance.
Working up to snatching 135lbs*** will give enough of those qualities to prepare you for a lot of those statistically very probable encounters, so for GPP working up to a 135lbs snatch is all you need.
The only reason to push for higher numbers in the snatch is because you either do it to improve the snatch itself (e.g. for Oly lifting) or to use it to build more power (or strength etc.). In both cases you know use it for a specific reason which makes it SPP.

***Note I just chose a random number here.
I think exactly this is a huge part for the GPP/SPP debate. At which number does GPP end and SPP begins? (rhetorical question ;))
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom