The Great LP Stall Thread of Shame

[CtMcBride]

How much NDTFP are we tolerating? I've got some logs from client LPs, but looking back at them, I went off script pretty early (adding in a bench variation on every pressing day after only 6 weeks or so, never dropping below DL every other session, etc.) I want to add to the data, but also don't want to muddy the waters with better programming. I also did a no benching LP once because I couldn't unfuck my elbow flexors. Not sure how that fits in.

Also, does a complete reset (squat restarted with bodyweight, and deadlift with the empty bar) due to injury count as a new LP or a continuation of the one during which I got injured?

[throwinshapes]

How much NDTFP are we tolerating? I've got some logs from client LPs, but looking back at them, I went off script pretty early (adding in a bench variation on every pressing day after only 6 weeks or so, never dropping below DL every other session, etc.) I want to add to the data, but also don't want to muddy the waters with better programming. I also did a no benching LP once because I couldn't unfuck my elbow flexors. Not sure how that fits in.

Also, does a complete reset (squat restarted with bodyweight, and deadlift with the empty bar) due to injury count as a new LP or a continuation of the one during which I got injured?

A notes column could be added if anyone ever wanted to look back at the data point for more detail.

[KarlM]

This is so accurate. The end of LP crushed me. I probably should have taken at least one week of deload (probably two). Instead I did the 90% thing for the Texas Method and tweaked my back a week later.

yeah, but then with two weeks off, motorpattern-coordination-wise you are totally off your game.

point is, its really really really stupid to ever incur THAT much fatigue....for me anyways.

DOES NOT WORK

I certainly agree that accumulating that much fatigue is stupid. However, I don't think a week or two of deload knocks you off your game that much. And however much you lost technique-wise, you get back real quick when you start back up again. That's been my experience, FWIW.

*At least not for squat/bench/deadlift. Maybe snatching and C&J is different. I don't have any experience with the technical requirements for those movements.

[PuddingFace]

I followed SSNLP programming from June 2016-January 2017. I stopped making progress after September, but reset a few times in an attempt to make more progress.

for 3x5
Squat 135->245
Bench 95->165
Deadlift 195->295

Weight was approximately constant while I was making progress; I gained 15 lbs of mostly fat from September-January.

Would have been nice to have a resource like this at the time. "Ending weights on the low side of normal, time to move on" would have been more productive in the long term than "YNDTP, keep grinding, eat more".

[KyleSchuant]

Entered both of my LP runs in.

We only want one lot of data for each person. Otherwise the guy that did it eight times would have to put himself in eight times. We're interested in the final results of SS NLP, whether that be, "and then I gave up lifting forever" or "and then I went on to other programming."

As well, in "stall" we can include not only a pure physiological stall, but a "I hate life now because it's always so fucking heavy and I'm tired of eating sheetcakes." After all, if your programme is so awful that nobody can complete it, that's useful data, too. For example, squatting sets of 20 and adding 5lbs a time three times a week would, we might expect, lead to people giving up at lighter weights than 3 sets of 5. If programme A leads to a 400lb squat, but only 1 out of 100 trainees finish it, while programme B leads to a 300lb squat, but 50 out of 100 trainees finish it, that's useful to know. If you want a big squatter for competition and have lots of people to churn through, A is better; if you want to promote general health in the general population and make your living training people so can't injure people willy-nilly, B is better.

Bear in mind also that some people have non-SS training histories with lifts comparable to or bigger than lifts achieved by most on SS NLP, like Hanley's bench. I mean, I had this guy from the globogym tag along with my clients to a novice meet once, 60kg, he had no programme, just came in and smashed himself on various machines and bench and deadlift, avoided squatting. He squatted 100kg, benched 100kg, and deadlifted 180kg. Again, no programming, no journal, just fucking around but going hard. If he went on to do SS NLP (haha), how would you tabulate that? So we can just lump all together as "previous training."

I think there should a differentiation in previously trained between “D1 javelin thrower with a brotastic bench” and “started LP halfway through the Hal Higdon Novice half marathon program”. Personally I’d be more interested in if the person’s LP is the first time doing barbell stuff.

As was noted elsewhere about the SSC written exam, it's pretty rare that we as trainers get people like that. Someone else suggested a "notes" section, which I've added. If you were an Olympic fencer or something, put that in. Likewise if you had some disease or whatever else you think relevant.

This is so accurate. The end of LP crushed me.

That whole novice/intermediate transition time is so tricky, and proper programming is only part of it. "How many people go past SS NLP?" leads to all sorts of uncomfortable questions and depressing thoughts, and you start to understand why SS focuses on the novice stage.

How much NDTFP are we tolerating?

I dunno. What do you think? Historically, how much deviation is tolerated by a guru depends on the results. If you half did it but got great results, "see? the programme always works." If you 99% did it but got less than great results, "you are NDTFP." Like Joe W working with an SSC and Rip's stretching to find some programming or technique flaw and eventually settles on, "you touched the bar a little low on your chest." Yeah, move it up an inch and add 50lbs, right?

Let's look at the standards SS used in their own analysis of novice logs. After some discussion and futzing about, they say,

In addition to recording at least four months of results, lifters here must have squatted an average of at least twice a week to signal at least vaguely following The Program (which we shall refer to as Kinda Did the Program or KDTP). They also must have started with 185 lbs. or less on the bar for the squat to signal a true(r??) novice.

We do not think that either additional assumption cherry picks the data since we are trying to observe what happens if a novice follows The Program. When we added what we perceived to be not terribly constricting assumptions, our sample size fell to 17. Only 5.2% of all males squatted with at least 67% of the frequency recommended by The Program and started out with less than 185 lbs. on the bar. This, itself, is a rather important discovery.

As an aside, it's amusing to note that their criteria would include people doing StrongLifts, and would also include the programming used in Rip's gym before he wrote SS. Ahem.

I don't care about four months, since the time is very much a factor of the rate of progression. Add 10lbs a time and get stuck in a few weeks, add 1lb a time and you might go for 12 months. And I don't care much about starting weights.

It's up to you, CT, but I'd say the criteria should be that they,

• high or low-bar squatted
• for at least 1 work set of 5s
• at least twice a week
• adding weight to the bar each time

Again, this includes approaches which would get you banned from SS these days. But that's as loose as their own analysis.

Would have been nice to have a resource like this at the time. "Ending weights on the low side of normal, time to move on" would have been more productive in the long term than "YNDTP, keep grinding, eat more".

There were a few of us talking about what we usually saw with trainees or experienced in the gym as lifters. We were told we were pussies, including by some now here. The information was always there, mate, it just wasn't in a chart.

[MattimusMaximus]

BW: 127 lbs ——————-> 225 lbs ——————->245 lbs

Start/ LP/ Intermediate
Squat: 95x5 ——————-> 345x5 —— ———-> 395x5
Bench: 155x5 ————-—-> 245x5 —————> 270x5
Deadlift: 225x5 —————> 365x5 —————> 390x5
Press: 95x5 ———————-> 160x5 —————> 180x5
PClean: 75x3 ——————-> 185x3 —————> 195x1

[KyleSchuant]

I've split out two sheets, so we have a men's and a women's.

I've put in cells to calculate the fraction of people reporting injury on SS NLP, which is current 33%.

I've also put in cells to show the median lifts achieved. Note, not the average, which is all the lifts added together and divided by the number of people reporting, and which can be thrown out by a few people with very high or very low lifts, but the median, ie half of those responding got more, half got less. As well, when you say "average", most people will actually think of "so 50% got X," ie the median.

Currently for the men, the median SS NLP squat is 305lb, press 130, deadlift 333 and bench 199. Only 11 of 36 reporting tell us a powerclean, but that median is 160lb; I suspect that only the more co-ordinated and explosive people tried the clean more than once or twice, so this number would skew upward compared to a population whose coaches made them do it for a few months.

[ChasingCurls69]

I did the power cleans but forgot to report them since they are generally not done. I think that got up to 195 5x3.

[TwoFoursStrohm]

Started I think Jan 2013 to Nov 2013 (took a month off to train for a Spartan Race in the summer).
5'9 200lb - > 220ish
Never really lifted much before this. Light bro splits before running 3 miles on treadmill was what i was doing for about 6 months before starting.

Squat 370 x 5 x 3 on Nov 3rd
Bench 230 x 5 x 3 on Oct 17th
OHP 125 x 5 x 3 on Oct 15th
DL 410 x 5 on Oct 22nd
Power Clean 180 x 3 x 5 on Dec 15th

[hector]

I don't remember my finishing NLP numbers. They were low. I have never been athletic.

I did want to recount my deadlift experience on NLP. I think some can relate.

I would push my deadlift as far as I could on that bullshit, low-volume NLP programming. RPE 13.5 out of 10, deep crimson on the Baraki scale. My single work set of 5 would be in the high 300's or low 400's. My 1 RM would get up to an ugly, screaming, soul-shaking 470 or 480. Then I would get injured. I ran LP multiple times and it ended this way, in injury and sub-500, multiple times.

Finally, I decided to do 3x5 for deadlift instead of 1x5. I started out real low, in the 200's. It worked. It wasn't hard. That little bit of volume made all the difference. When I hit 430 or 435 for 3 sets of 5 months later I decided to just go for it; I pulled 500 easily. No soul wrenching, no drama. In retrospect, had I used RPE back then, it would likely have been an 8.

Too bad I was such a moron that at the time I didn't apply the higher-volume, lower-intensity lesson to my programming broadly.

[Savs]

I did want to recount my deadlift experience on NLP. I think some can relate.

I would push my deadlift as far as I could on that bullshit, low-volume NLP programming. RPE 13.5 out of 10, deep crimson on the Baraki scale. My single work set of 5 would be in the high 300's or low 400's. My 1 RM would get up to an ugly, screaming, soul-shaking 470 or 480. Then I would get injured. I ran LP multiple times and it ended this way, in injury and sub-500, multiple times.

Finally, I decided to do 3x5 for deadlift instead of 1x5. I started out real low, in the 200's. It worked. It wasn't hard. That little bit of volume made all the difference. When I hit 430 or 435 for 3 sets of 5 months later I decided to just go for it; I pulled 500 easily. No soul wrenching, no drama. In retrospect, had I used RPE back then, it would likely have been an 8.

Too bad I was such a moron that at the time I didn't apply the higher-volume, lower-intensity lesson to my programming broadly.

I didn't do StStNLP, so I can't contribute to this thread. However, I can relate to your post, hector!

I did the 1x5 once a week, and kept getting hammered. I eventually pushed it out to once every nine days. The SRA cycle was getting longer... Hahahaha. It sucked. It felt like I had forgotten the movement every time it came around to the deadlift. Walked around for two days afterward like I got hit by a garbage truck. That was around 425 for a set of 5. Finally gave up.

Now I do SGDLs twice a week, but still don't know anything about programming deadlifts so I'll shut up in a second. What blew my mind is one day while I was on travel I visited some random smallish gym and decided, for various reasons (mainly because some douchey loud bros were strutting around like roosters trying to get the attention of one cute girl), that I with my gray hair should quietly load up the bar and do a set of conventional deadlift. Pulled 405x5, normal skin tone on the Baraki scale. After not having done them for many months -- probably close to a year, it was like a walk in the park. Could've kept going no probelm. Made me a believer in the SGDL and Mr Hanley's advice.

[Sloop]

I have run the LP a few times. When I did things most correctly with good technique at 6'1" 225 and not to fluffy ending numbers were....

s 340 3x5

B 240 3x5

P 155 3x5

DL 385 x5

Never could nail PC form so only a 165x3 there.
I've done all kinds of different programming but find I'm a better responder to higher intensity/ lower volume so there's that.

More data if you'd like. I'd done 20 years of mostly waste of time exercise programs P90x, Athlean X, Men's health/fitness BS. At 42 years old thinking I was already passed my prime I discovered BB training via SL,SS, Martin Berkham. I started my first LP at about 195lbs, was self taught via the book . started with a 185 S , 270 DL 115 P and 200 ish bench. First few LP attempts I DNDTP as I didn't eat well enough, my form sucked and had many resets. I did some other programs then came back to SSLP. Persistence paid off and my 3rd attempt at LP is what you see above.

[Monoides]

I've split out two sheets, so we have a men's and a women's.

I've put in cells to calculate the fraction of people reporting injury on SS NLP, which is current 33%.

I've also put in cells to show the median lifts achieved. Note, not the average, which is all the lifts added together and divided by the number of people reporting, and which can be thrown out by a few people with very high or very low lifts, but the median, ie half of those responding got more, half got less. As well, when you say "average", most people will actually think of "so 50% got X," ie the median.

Currently for the men, the median SS NLP squat is 305lb, press 130, deadlift 333 and bench 199. Only 11 of 36 reporting tell us a powerclean, but that median is 160lb; I suspect that only the more co-ordinated and explosive people tried the clean more than once or twice, so this number would skew upward compared to a population whose coaches made them do it for a few months.

Cool spreadsheet bro.

Added in my PC approximate - I actually enjoyed doing them because deadlifting and squatting turned into torture at the end and despite being the most unathletic human being in the entire universe (TMUHBITEU) I think my shoddy technique was ultimately what held me back there. I ultimately stopped doing them because they weren't going anywhere.

Also worth saying - I was resting 10 minutes or more between squat sets by the end. Bench and press never more than 3-5 I think, but squats were atrocious. So atrocious I still dread them when I have to do them for any amount of volume or intensity if I'm honest.

[Ragholmes]

The whole spreadsheet got all jacked up. Everything after Squats was moved up a line. I just went through every post in the thread and redid it all. By all means, please check my work. Anyone who added stuff in that wasn't posted in this thread please recheck. @throwinshapes You didn't post your numbers in the thread, I'm pretty sure yours needs to be looked at, it has exactly the same numbers as the line below you.

I didn't realize we have a Sloop and a Stoop

[jwilson625]

Added my numbers for base LP + "running it out." This was on my own to start and with SSOC + a couple in-person sessions towards the end.

27, male, 5'10"
Played sports in HS and trained in undergrad, average athleticism at best
No injuries on LP
Apr-Dec 2017 (yes, I kept trying because I thought I should have gotten farther)
Started with Wolf/SSOC in Sept. 2017
BW 175-212
S 320x5x1
B 220x3x2
D 350x5x1
P 141x3x3
PC 155x3

[KyleSchuant]

Thanks, Ragholmes. The advantage of making it open to all to edit is that anyone can play with it. The disadvantage is the same.

Savs, in my novices we're finding the same with sgdl --> dl, and ohp --> bp and fsq --> sq too, for that matter. It doesn't seem to be improving first three months retention so far - but those who do stick around are happier.

[throwinshapes]

The whole spreadsheet got all jacked up. Everything after Squats was moved up a line. I just went through every post in the thread and redid it all. By all means, please check my work. Anyone who added stuff in that wasn't posted in this thread please recheck. @throwinshapes You didn't post your numbers in the thread, I'm pretty sure yours needs to be looked at, it has exactly the same numbers as the line below you.

Yup, corrected in the sheet.

Training History: 1 Yr. of training history before this, including 2 LP's. This LP run with SSOC
Age: 28, Height: 70in, Bodyweight:185 -> 195 lb

SQ: 280 x 5
BN: 202.5 x 5
DL: 335 x 5
PR: 121 x 5

[FredM]

I find the "previously trained" data point basically useless.

A better data point would be "previous best e1rm" before starting SS. I'm "previously trained" in the sense I benched a few dozen times in my life and deadlifted a handful of times. That's hardly comparable to guys claiming 200/300/400/500 ending LP numbers when they had basically already hit those numbers in college and decided to pick barbells back up a decade later. That's the cool thing about strength. You don't really lose it.

E.g. I couldn't squat 135x5 -- I tried and tweaked my back on the third rep. I couldn't pull 275 for 1 -- I tried and failed before LP. I COULD bench 155x10. So my bench numbers don't look that bad but in reality they're terrible. I basically added 1 lb to my bench for every 1 lb of bw I gained.

BW: 194 -> 212

SQ: 115 -> 305
DL: 225 -> 345
PR: 95 -> 135
BP: 155 -> 194

All were 3x5 -> 1x5 with backoffs. I technically continued Squats to 315x3, but that was @10 so I was even weaker from fatigue.

My "LP" lasted 6 months. After stalling on upper body after 2 months I paid over a thousand dollars to be "reset" by SSOC and add another 5-10 lbs to my bench/press over 4 more months. I had also already gotten to 285/330 on squat/pull -- so that was money really well spent.

[KyleSchuant]

I find the "previously trained" data point basically useless.

A better data point would be "previous best e1rm" before starting SS.

You have the thread, and all the raw data everyone else has access to. Collate it and order it as you see fit, then share it with us. Your first challenge: to actually get the data. A good number of those reporting so far didn't even mention their height. Getting their entire training and sporting history may be challenging.

If you get the data, I'm just not sure how you quantify it. Maybe Bob trained up to squatting 400lbs, but Charlie never lifted while playing football, he just ate a lot and smashed into people. Bob's experience is straightforward enough, now how do you quantify Charlie's?

[cwd]

I find the "previously trained" data point basically useless.

A better data point would be "previous best e1rm" before starting SS.

If you get the data, I'm just not sure how you quantify it. Maybe Bob trained up to squatting 400lbs, but Charlie never lifted while playing football, he just ate a lot and smashed into people. Bob's experience is straightforward enough, now how do you quantify Charlie's?

It's an important point though. It's many times faster to recover strength after detraining than to develop that strength the first time.

A detrained 35-year-old ex-athlete is going to make *any* program look good, until they hit approximately their old peak strength.

Besides that, there's a selection effect. The population of (people chosen for varsity sports at age 16) is more athletically gifted on average than the overall population. So the 35-year-old who never trained before not only lacks muscle memory but likely has lower potential in the first place.

Not sure how you assign a plausible e1rm to someone who hasn't done the powerlifts before though.