Request for participants

[damufunman]

@damufunman Right, I forgot that since H incorporates e1RM, it can still stay the same while volume goes up.
I'm not a mather, but (and this might be exactly what @Hanley is doing?) you could set up a 3-4wk "block" where you hit, say, 600H every session, V starts high then drops as intensity increases, and the block ends with a new e1RM established for the next block?


Sorry if this is re-hashing discussions that already took place. I'm late to this particular party, and unless Hanley can open up more spots and figure out how to bill it so my work thinks it's a gym membership, I'm just going to keep trying to roll 6's for my sanity checks against my own poor programming decisions.

H-value has reps though. So if by increasing volume ([math]reps \times sets[/math]) you have more total reps so H goes up for same intensity. Tonnage increases could be either total reps or weight on the bar increase, which could just be an increase in 1RM with same %, so that wouldn't necessarily affect H.
Don't see why your block wouldn't work. Give it a go and report back, we're into experimenting here! Actually, kinda what I'm doing, but H is also going up because I'm adding sets week to week.

[ChrisA]

If I'm reading that accurately, the H formula begins by assuming recovery capabilities are similar from one person to the next, regardless of age, gender, size, level of training advancement, and other variables like sleep, diet, etc.

I am interpreting that accurately? If so, then I assume you eventually find YOUR baseline H, and adjust accordingly?

Thanks!

[Chebass88]

I’m glad this came up- incorporating the idea of H-value into progressive overload.

I’ve never understood why tonnage alone, applied correctly, couldn’t be the only variable that has to increase to satisfy progressive overload.

Chebass88 has done will with, for the most part, (todays tonnage)>(yesterdays tonnage). ... It hasn't seemed to work for me, at least in the ways I have implemented it.

I've always interpreted it as tonnage at a given intensity (perhaps this what @broseph means by "applied correctly"), which makes the average intensity per session increase.

For example, let's assume you're doing bench press at 300lbs (for example purposes only), with 135x5, 185x3, 225x3, 275x1 warmups.

Session 1: 300x16 total reps. With warmups, tonnage = 6980, average weight 249.3lb

Session 2: 300x18 total reps (same warmup). Tonnage = 7580, average 252.7lb

OR, you could add a triple at 225 to get a roughly similar tonnage increase:

Session 3: 300x16 + 225x3, same warmup, tonnage = 7655, average weight = 246.9lb

The approach I've taken most often is that Session 2 is a better approach than Session 3. Tonnage and average intensity increases over time. When increasing weight, restart at lower number of reps and work your way back up, e.g., go from 16 --> 24, add a little bit, restart at 16 & go to 24.

[quark]

So, is the math voodoo for the entire session, or is it measured per lift (S/B/D)?

Per lift, but you've got to consider the quasi-additive fatigue in lifts that share muscle groups (ie low bar and deadlift).

Is there such a thing as systematic fatigue that would suggest a bit more addition, such as fatigue from heavy deadlifts carrying over to bench? Or am I trying to introduce too much precision into the metric? Rely on RPE to deal with this issue?

[Allentown]

@damufunman
Right, I'm just thinking that if programming keeps H constant, and cycles intensity through a block (in my case, starting intensity low then increasing it each session), tonnage is going to go down.
So if we set H=650 (benching every 4 days), e1RM is 252, and start with 185lbs training weight, and 5lb jumps:
185lb x 46 reps the first session, H=650, V=8500
190 x 39 reps, H=650, V=7475
195 x 33 reps, H=650, V=6485
Then, say, do AMRAP @90% of your e1RM and calculate a new e1RM

Or, start the cycle at 70% 1RM, and advance by 5% each session, so
176.25x59, H=650, V=10351
190x39, H=650, V=7475
201.25x26, H=650, V=5305
Then do AMRAP @90% of your e1RM and calculate a new e1RM

Or fuark me, start H at 600, and increase that by 10 each block, too, to account for improving recovery?

[damufunman]

@damufunman
Right, I'm just thinking that if programming keeps H constant, and cycles intensity through a block (in my case, starting intensity low then increasing it each session), tonnage is going to go down.
So if we set H=650 (benching every 4 days), e1RM is 252, and start with 185lbs training weight, and 5lb jumps:
185lb x 46 reps the first session, H=650, V=8500
190 x 39 reps, H=650, V=7475
195 x 33 reps, H=650, V=6485
Then, say, do AMRAP @90% of your e1RM and calculate a new e1RM

Or, start the cycle at 70% 1RM, and advance by 5% each session, so
176.25x59, H=650, V=10351
190x39, H=650, V=7475
201.25x26, H=650, V=5305
Then do AMRAP @90% of your e1RM and calculate a new e1RM

Or fuark me, start H at 600, and increase that by 10 each block, too, to account for improving recovery?

Gotcha. Though it's possible that your first example might be decreasing H if you're 1RM goes up week to week. I think it's dependent on your rate of gainzZz, right?

[augeleven]

When you need to bump to a month, use this as week 1, then let this be your guide:

Week 1: as above
Week 2: add some volume, hold intenities
Week 3: bump intensities, cut volume
Week 4: bump intensities yet more, cut volume

cycle through again.

I was reading through the Greg nuckols training guide and he mentions that intermediates should routinely going for smalls PRs.

...At first, use 4 week training blocks, shooting for small PRs every 4 weeks...

I'm in my second week of running my mutation of HPS (no dedicated power day, heavy singles before hypertrophy) and I'm thinking of trying to plan out a monthly cycle like above.

Would it be unreasonable to attempt small PRs on week 4 power day?

I'm thinking of something like this for squat
Power Day
w1: 85%x1x3
w2: 90%x1, 85%x1x3
w3: 85%,90%, 92.5%, 85%
w4: work up to training max plus 5#

[cgeorg]

Actually, Hanley you'd mentioned that during the course of the programming you'd seen the need for more work @7+. Can you talk about where you're fitting that in? I put my top single on strength day before volume stuff, and some of the later strength sets probably end up getting to @7, but I'm curious how many reps at that intensity you're seeing a need for?

Give us the SORAT!

[Hanley]

Actually, Hanley you'd mentioned that during the course of the programming you'd seen the need for more work @7+. Can you talk about where you're fitting that in? I put my top single on strength day before volume stuff, and some of the later strength sets probably end up getting to @7, but I'm curious how many reps at that intensity you're seeing a need for?

Give us the SORAT!

Yeah, more singles and (maybe) doubles @/over 7.

Where they go depends on the cycle-length and where you are in the cycle. I've got peeps using 1-week and some using 8+.

Normally, they just go on power day. I think that's appropriate for most lifters.

But, during a strength biased block shit gets a little more complicated. During a strength block "hypertrophy" might be work at 85% and "strength" might be singles at 90% (so, there's lots of @7+ work). In a week like this, "power" becomes fast and light and low-stress.

[cgeorg]

Yeah, more singles and (maybe) doubles @/over 7.

Where they go depends on the cycle-length and where you are in the cycle. I've got peeps using 1-week and some using 8+.

Normally, they just go on power day. I think that's appropriate for most lifters.

But, during a strength biased block shit gets a little more complicated. During a strength block "hypertrophy" might be work at 85% and "strength" might be singles at 90% (so, there's lots of @7+ work). In a week like this, "power" becomes fast and light and low-stress.

So if someone had H day in the low 70s and S in the low 80s, you'd have power day work up to something like 2-3 singles @89+, 2-3 doubles @86+?

So for bench with e1RM = 220, if going for basic weekly progression without any real bias, something like
1x1@165 = 75% = @2
1x1@180 = 82% = @4.5
3x1@195 = 89% = @7
2x2@185 = 85% = @6.5 but with some fatigue so more likely @7+

or more like

1x1@165 = 75% = @2
1x1@180 = 82% = @4.5
1x1@195 = 89% = @7
1x1@202.5 = 92% = @8
1x1@195 = 89% = @7 but will end up being harder
2x2@195 = 89% = @8 but will end up being harder

?

[Allentown]

Gotcha. Though it's possible that your first example might be decreasing H if you're 1RM goes up week to week. I think it's dependent on your rate of gainzZz, right?

Well, yes. Technically, your H would go down after each session, since you should be getting stronger. So bumping it up by, dunno, 5 each session to account for it might make sense, until you actually get to a test phase and find out what happened.

So the hypothetical 70% cycle would go:

252 e1RM
176.25x59, H=650, V=10399
190x40, H=655, V=760
201.25x27, H=660, V=5334

then, you test 226.25 AMRAP, get 5. Next cycle would be
260e1RM
182.5x58, H=650, V=10585
195x41, H=655, V=7995
207.5x27, H=660, V=5603

[Hanley]

Yeah, more singles and (maybe) doubles @/over 7.

Where they go depends on the cycle-length and where you are in the cycle. I've got peeps using 1-week and some using 8+.

Normally, they just go on power day. I think that's appropriate for most lifters.

But, during a strength biased block shit gets a little more complicated. During a strength block "hypertrophy" might be work at 85% and "strength" might be singles at 90% (so, there's lots of @7+ work). In a week like this, "power" becomes fast and light and low-stress.

So if someone had H day in the low 70s and S in the low 80s, you'd have power day work up to something like 2-3 singles @89+, 2-3 doubles @86+?

So for bench with e1RM = 220, if going for basic weekly progression without any real bias, something like
1x1@165 = 75% = @2
1x1@180 = 82% = @4.5
3x1@195 = 89% = @7
2x2@185 = 85% = @6.5 but with some fatigue so more likely @7+

or more like

1x1@165 = 75% = @2
1x1@180 = 82% = @4.5
1x1@195 = 89% = @7
1x1@202.5 = 92% = @8
1x1@195 = 89% = @7 but will end up being harder
2x2@195 = 89% = @8 but will end up being harder

I'd go a bit more conservative.

1x2@75%
1@80%
1@85%
1@90 or 92%
1 or 2x2@85%
2x2@80%

You should end a "Power Day" session feeling motivated, confident and fresh.

[tmpk]

Do you guys notice a difference in H-values and fatigue on different lifts? I.e, does a H-value of 400 on squat beat you up more than H=400 on bench? Seems like I can throw volume and higher intensity singles/doubles at bench/press and recover fine, but I need to be more careful on squats. I've been doing high intensity deads once a week as well though, so that may confound things for me.

[SpinyNorman]

Do you guys notice a difference in H-values and fatigue on different lifts? I.e, does a H-value of 400 on squat beat you up more than H=400 on bench? Seems like I can throw volume and higher intensity singles/doubles at bench/press and recover fine, but I need to be more careful on squats. I've been doing high intensity deads once a week as well though, so that may confound things for me.

Definitely. I can handle quite a bit higher H value on bench than on squats.

If Hanley was matching my H values for Squats and Bench I suspect one of two things would happen:
1) I'd be DED
2) My bench wouldn't go anywhere

I'm sure DL affects squat a bit, so a direct comparison in H values between squat and bench probably isn't a fair comparison to begin with.

[MWY]

I'm considering switching to a more traditional DUP rep-range setup to keep workout times shorter (hopefully in the 1h - 1h15m range). As part of the shorter workout time goal, I'd be rotating the HPS cycle to different days per exercise:

Lift:	M:	W:	F:
Sq:	H	P	S
B:	S	H	P
D:	P	S	H

Can I get some thoughts on the following setup?

Week:	H:	P:	S:
1:	70% x 8 x 3 (SB), x 5 x 3 (D)	85% x 1, (B + 70% x 2 x 3)	80% x 4 x 4 (SB), x 2 x 4 (D)
2:	70% x 8 x 4 (SB), x 5 x 3 (D)	90% x 1, (B + 75% x 2 x 2)	80% x 4 x 5 (SB), x 2 x 5 (D)
3:	75% x 4 x 5 (SB), x 4 x 3 (D)	95% x 1, (B + 80% x 1 x 3)	82% x 3 x 5 (SB), x 2 x 4 (D)

Week 4 would probably be a test week where I attempt a 2.5-5kg PR.

I've loved working with Hanley and doing lots of smaller sets, but due to my work schedule I'm starting to think I need to keep my workouts shorter than the Montana Method allows for.

[Hanley]

^ Looks good. I'd just be careful with the intensities on the Week 3 Power Day. The "elegance" (oh, pretty pattern) and simplicity of jacking up intensities for all 3 sessions is tempting...but too risky, I think.

I've done a bunch of different things for different people with the power days, but I think my default setup for top singles has been

Week 1:
85% + drops

Week 2

92% + few drops

Week

90% + more drops

It really confused people, but I think it balanced stress a bit better.

[KarlM]

Has anyone else on the Montana Method noticed size gains? My chest and quads are growing. Wish I'd taken some pre measurements. It's legit happening though.

[MWY]

^ Looks good. I'd just be careful with the intensities on the Week 3 Power Day. The "elegance" (oh, pretty pattern) and simplicity of jacking up intensities for all 3 sessions is tempting...but too risky, I think.

I've done a bunch of different things for different people with the power days, but I think my default setup for top singles has been

Week 1:
85% + drops

Week 2

92% + few drops

Week

90% + more drops

It really confused people, but I think it balanced stress a bit better.

Thanks! I'll modify the template I wrote up accordingly.

[cgeorg]

I'm considering switching to a more traditional DUP rep-range setup to keep workout times shorter (hopefully in the 1h - 1h15m range). As part of the shorter workout time goal, I'd be rotating the HPS cycle to different days per exercise:

Lift:	M:	W:	F:
Sq:	H	P	S
B:	S	H	P
D:	P	S	H

If low back recovery becomes an issue I'd split Squat and Dead strength days to M and F.

[Hanley]

I'm considering switching to a more traditional DUP rep-range setup to keep workout times shorter (hopefully in the 1h - 1h15m range). As part of the shorter workout time goal, I'd be rotating the HPS cycle to different days per exercise:

Lift:	M:	W:	F:
Sq:	H	P	S
B:	S	H	P
D:	P	S	H

If low back recovery becomes an issue I'd split Squat and Dead strength days to M and F.

I've been trying to make a "time efficient MM". For a time hack, one forumite suggested something like this for deadlift work:

Monday

Deadlift accessory 1: hinge priority (so, RDLs, SGRDLs...something fast and light).

Wed

Deadlift (you could simply do a weekly linear progression on these..so week 1: single + 70%; week 2: single + 75%, week 3: 80%; week 4: test or 85%)

Fri

Deadlift accessory 2: upper back priority (maybe a circuit of rows partnered with GHR)

^ this setup nicely spreads lumbar fatigue.