SSOC vs BBM? Why would you ever choose SSOC?

[throwinshapes]

... When it comes to SSOC ...

That's a excellent summary of how I feel about my experience with them.

[Hanley]

For "strength" you gotta grow muscle and refine motor programs. Dead simple

Yeah. Yet I see people worrying if they should do 3x5 or 4x4, 70% or 75%, 5x5 or 7x5 and searching for an optimal program post novice LP. Maybe I'm a susceptible to seeing that as I was also asking same questions in the past. I remember DUP-ing SSLP because Nuckols wrote an article on how you can speed up your novice gains. Didn't really work.

I'm guessing this excessive hand-wringing and optimal program hunting just feels like "due diligence" .

This impulse manifests in the more experienced athlete as meticulous tracking of largely non-predictive/useless data.

[convergentsum]

For "strength" you gotta grow muscle and refine motor programs. Dead simple

Yeah. Yet I see people worrying if they should do 3x5 or 4x4, 70% or 75%, 5x5 or 7x5 and searching for an optimal program post novice LP, constantly tweaking and optimizing...

What we're all looking for is a sense of proportion. Some things are not important.

Maybe I'm a susceptible to seeing that as I was also asking same questions in the past. I remember DUP-ing SSLP because Nuckols wrote an article on how you can speed up your novice gains. Didn't really work.

I hope you felt it was it a worthwhile experiment, at least. (Isn't LP already lightening fast?, how could DUP be even faster?)
I'd make an effort to be slower to accept any new findings I come across. There are a lot of competing theories out there, and none has a monopoly on the evidence. For any paper published last month, how likely is it that rival paper calling its findings into question will be published by the end of the year?

edit: So yeah, I'm actually not that against DTFP in early stages of lifting and that includes post-SSLP.

Yes. Skepticism is a laudable trait (by which I mean, it's a trait I share, therefore I admire it in others), but you've got to suspend it while you get your actual training in.

[cwd]

For "strength" you gotta grow muscle and refine motor programs. Dead simple

Yeah. Yet I see people worrying if they should do 3x5 or 4x4, 70% or 75%, 5x5 or 7x5 and searching for an optimal program post novice LP. Maybe I'm a susceptible to seeing that as I was also asking same questions in the past. I remember DUP-ing SSLP because Nuckols wrote an article on how you can speed up your novice gains. Didn't really work.

I'm guessing this excessive hand-wringing and optimal program hunting just feels like "due diligence" .

This impulse manifests in the more experienced athlete as meticulous tracking of largely non-predictive/useless data.

Re: obsessing over details (3x5 vs 4x4), there's a hierarchy of concerns for lifters. Work your way up this list, and don't fuss about things out-of-order.

Here's the sequence of concerns as far as I can tell so far:

1) Consistently follow a lifting program. Like, 90% compliance or better.
2) Good form on the lifts to allow (1). May require coaching.
3) A decent program, that includes either a coach prescribing weights or an auto-regulation scheme. Automatic +5 lbs/week is insufficient. Should include decent volume at 65-80% and some practice at higher intensities. Should hit major muscle groups 2x/week or more each. Must avoid injury to allow (1) and (2).
4) Bodyweight control -- cut to a healthy level of bodyfat and recomp or cut/bulk while staying around a 2:1 height/waist ratio. Learn how to eat to a plan.
5) Maybe properly individualized programming? Not here yet.

[Hanley]

For "strength" you gotta grow muscle and refine motor programs. Dead simple

Yeah. Yet I see people worrying if they should do 3x5 or 4x4, 70% or 75%, 5x5 or 7x5 and searching for an optimal program post novice LP. Maybe I'm a susceptible to seeing that as I was also asking same questions in the past. I remember DUP-ing SSLP because Nuckols wrote an article on how you can speed up your novice gains. Didn't really work.

I'm guessing this excessive hand-wringing and optimal program hunting just feels like "due diligence" .

This impulse manifests in the more experienced athlete as meticulous tracking of largely non-predictive/useless data.

Re: obsessing over details (3x5 vs 4x4), there's a hierarchy of concerns for lifters. Work your way up this list, and don't fuss about things out-of-order.

Here's the sequence of concerns as far as I can tell so far:

1) Consistently follow a lifting program. Like, 90% compliance or better.
2) Good form on the lifts to allow (1). May require coaching.
3) A decent program, that includes either a coach prescribing weights or an auto-regulation scheme. Automatic +5 lbs/week is insufficient. Should include decent volume at 65-80% and some practice at higher intensities. Should hit major muscle groups 2x/week or more each. Must avoid injury to allow (1) and (2).
4) Bodyweight control -- cut to a healthy level of bodyfat and recomp or cut/bulk while staying around or under 2:1 height/waist ratio. Learn how to eat to a plan.
5) Maybe properly individualized programming? Not here yet.

Yeah, I'd agree with that hierarchy.

[RyanB]

For "strength" you gotta grow muscle and refine motor programs. Dead simple

Yeah. Yet I see people worrying if they should do 3x5 or 4x4, 70% or 75%, 5x5 or 7x5 and searching for an optimal program post novice LP. Maybe I'm a susceptible to seeing that as I was also asking same questions in the past. I remember DUP-ing SSLP because Nuckols wrote an article on how you can speed up your novice gains. Didn't really work.

I'm guessing this excessive hand-wringing and optimal program hunting just feels like "due diligence" .

This impulse manifests in the more experienced athlete as meticulous tracking of largely non-predictive/useless data.

Re: obsessing over details (3x5 vs 4x4), there's a hierarchy of concerns for lifters. Work your way up this list, and don't fuss about things out-of-order.

Here's the sequence of concerns as far as I can tell so far:

1) Consistently follow a lifting program. Like, 90% compliance or better.
2) Good form on the lifts to allow (1). May require coaching.
3) A decent program, that includes either a coach prescribing weights or an auto-regulation scheme. Automatic +5 lbs/week is insufficient. Should include decent volume at 65-80% and some practice at higher intensities. Should hit major muscle groups 2x/week or more each. Must avoid injury to allow (1) and (2).
4) Bodyweight control -- cut to a healthy level of bodyfat and recomp or cut/bulk while staying around or under 2:1 height/waist ratio. Learn how to eat to a plan.
5) Maybe properly individualized programming? Not here yet.

Yeah, I'd agree with that hierarchy.

Yeah, I think this is good stuff too. And I am really starting to see what Jordan and Austin are saying about taking the long-term perspective and building the right foundation (and I know they're certainly not the first to say that). I know when I started SSLP, and while I was doing it, I really thought about this just in terms of getting more weight on the bar as quickly as I could, or it was my fault, or I could never get those gains in the future. But then, sometimes I'd start to let form-creep set in and I'd make bad habits, then I'd have to reset to work on form again. Many (including myself) could have kept adding bodyweight pretty rapidly and likely continued adding 5 lbs for a little while longer. But then, for me, getting a waistline teetering on too big, and for the first time some borderline blood markers, and not being able to fit into most of my clothes (and not thighs or shoulders, but in the belly), made me have to spend a significant amount of productive training time in a calorie deficit that isn't as conducive to long-term steady strength gains [and I admit the bodyweight thing was a personal decision]. All of this has been discussed a lot on here and on other forums, but that is just where I'm at right now in the "learning this myself" process.

[KyleSchuant]

Interesting, Australia's first SSC has bailed on them for BBM.

[quark]

Interesting, Australia's first SSC has bailed on them for BBM.

"As time passed, and my experience and knowledge grew, I found myself drawn towards coaching tools that didn’t necessarily conform with the stated positions of Starting Strength, and Starting Strength Online Coaching."

I wonder how high a percentage of SSCs agree.

Jordan has recommended Joe a number of times, so not a total surprise.

[Les]

For "strength" you gotta grow muscle and refine motor programs. Dead simple

Yeah. Yet I see people worrying if they should do 3x5 or 4x4, 70% or 75%, 5x5 or 7x5 and searching for an optimal program post novice LP, constantly tweaking and optimizing... Maybe I'm a susceptible to seeing that as I was also asking same questions in the past. I remember DUP-ing SSLP because Nuckols wrote an article on how you can speed up your novice gains. Didn't really work.

edit: So yeah, I'm actually not that against DTFP in early stages of lifting and that includes post-SSLP.

I'm ok with someone doing the program to start. But the second it starts to not really work, I would bail on it and do something else. I would also add in a little more upper body work, since that is lacking compared to squats and deadlifts (initially).

But I don't think people are questing for the one optimal program. The truth is that there is nothing like that. For me, squatting 2x per week over a long period of time doesn't work. I do better squatting 1x per week. I need to find something that is more optimal for me. So really it is about trying a concept or even full training program out and see how it goes. Ditch something if it doesn't work, try it again if it did. Over time if it stops working, trying adding volume, etc. As you advance as a lifter, you will need something more customized for your own progress. I think right now, being more of a novice lifter, you aren't really seeing that. Many different things can work right away, and depending on your genetics, there is more or less room for error. The margin for error gets tighter as you advance, no matter who you are.

[asdf]

Interesting, Australia's first SSC has bailed on them for BBM.

I thought you were Australia's first SSC.

[mbasic]

Interesting, Australia's first SSC has bailed on them for BBM.

not only that, he was SSOC also and now steps away from that also (of course).

Good luck to SSOC trying to enforce that no compete clause overseas.

[jwilson625]

Interesting, Australia's first SSC has bailed on them for BBM.

not only that, he was SSOC also and now steps away from that also (of course).

Good luck to SSOC trying to enforce that no compete clause overseas.

Also somewhat noteworthy that he ran a Starting Strength gym. Are they the first to end that affiliation?

[mbasic]

Interesting, Australia's first SSC has bailed on them for BBM.

not only that, he was SSOC also and now steps away from that also (of course).

Good luck to SSOC trying to enforce that no compete clause overseas.

Also somewhat noteworthy that he ran a Starting Strength gym. Are they the first to end that affiliation?

Didn't catch that.
Could only imagine the legal mumbo jumbo that goes along with that arrangement.
All nul and void being Australia I'm sure.
...convenient way out.

...interesting that he was only knighted as SSC in 2016. That was quick

[throwinshapes]

...interesting that he was only knighted as SSC in 2016. That was quick

I'm sure Alan has him beat, right?

[KyleSchuant]

Tom C's website and his authour bio on SS.com no longer mention him as an SSC, and his forum handle (last activity April 30th) just has "member" as a subtitle. I take it he's left, too? I hope he's still coaching.

[quark]

Tom C's website and his authour bio on SS.com no longer mention him as an SSC, and his forum handle (last activity April 30th) just has "member" as a subtitle. I take it he's left, too? I hope he's still coaching.

He's joined BBM.

[mbasic]

I think the cert is good for three year before you have to jump through all the hoops to re-cert.
That will be probably the jumping off point for many.

[mouse]

...interesting that he was only knighted as SSC in 2016. That was quick

I'm sure Alan has him beat, right?

Did Alan actually relinquish it? I don't remember him ever mentioning it period after the split. It was my perception that he still had it.

[quark]

...interesting that he was only knighted as SSC in 2016. That was quick

I'm sure Alan has him beat, right?

Did Alan actually relinquish it? I don't remember him ever mentioning it period after the split. It was my perception that he still had it.

Yes. See https://startingstrength.org/site/coaches

[mouse]

...interesting that he was only knighted as SSC in 2016. That was quick

I'm sure Alan has him beat, right?

Did Alan actually relinquish it? I don't remember him ever mentioning it period after the split. It was my perception that he still had it.

Yes. See https://startingstrength.org/site/coaches

I stand corrected.