Isn't all programming bullshit?

All training and programming related queries and banter here

Moderators: mgil, chromoly, Manveer

Adams
Registered User
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2019 2:03 am

Re: Isn't all programming bullshit?

#41

Post by Adams » Thu Feb 16, 2023 3:07 pm

DCR wrote: Thu Feb 16, 2023 2:32 pm I’m sure that I or someone else has linked it before, but this is the article that I mentioned, which has some bearing on this thread: https://npcnewsonline.com/powerbuilding ... gym/63930/
I love this article. I remember reading this years ago when it came out and often going back to read it.

User avatar
alek
Registered User
Posts: 3146
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2018 4:11 pm
Location: 2 gainzZz goblinz
Age: 42

Re: Isn't all programming bullshit?

#42

Post by alek » Thu Feb 16, 2023 5:30 pm

DCR wrote: Thu Feb 16, 2023 2:32 pm I’m sure that I or someone else has linked it before, but this is the article that I mentioned, which has some bearing on this thread: https://npcnewsonline.com/powerbuilding ... gym/63930/
Thanks for that!!

SSJBartSimpson
Registered User
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2022 9:34 pm
Contact:

Re: Isn't all programming bullshit?

#43

Post by SSJBartSimpson » Sun Feb 19, 2023 9:02 pm

CheekiBreekiFitness wrote: Sat Feb 11, 2023 9:45 pm The fact that you have to figure out what type of programming works for you through trial and error does not make programming "bullshit".

What is actual bullshit is people selling you non individualized templates and giving broad recommendations like "beginners should do sets of X reps", or "the best exercise to bring up your squat is Y", or "anyone who does program Z will gain 30 lbs on their squat" or whatever.

Some people need a lot of volume at medium intensities, some people need a small amount of volume at high intensities, some people need to squat 3 times a week, some people need to squat 1 times a week etc. As you alluded to, the body is an extremely complex, adaptive system, and so it's impossible to predict what type of program will yield good results without trying it a few times and logging your training to analyze the results. That's more or less the RTS approach to programming, and it seems to work pretty well.

Also, if the program that you highlighted has yielded good results in the past, why do you think that it's unreasonable that it will continue to give you good results in the future ?

PS: is "halting deadlift" rippetoe-speak for paused deadlifts ?
Halting deadlifts are partial ROM deadlifts where you bring the bar to just above your knees, the compliment to a block/rack pull.

SSJBartSimpson
Registered User
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2022 9:34 pm
Contact:

Re: Isn't all programming bullshit?

#44

Post by SSJBartSimpson » Sun Feb 19, 2023 9:15 pm

I don't really know if there's much to discuss here, but if what you're doing is driving up your numbers and you're enjoying it there's no reason to change it. Personally, TM worked ok for me, BBM programming has worked better. I look forward to trying out other programs like ATS and Candito in the future.

User avatar
CheekiBreekiFitness
Registered User
Posts: 684
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2022 3:46 am

Re: Isn't all programming bullshit?

#45

Post by CheekiBreekiFitness » Mon Feb 20, 2023 2:21 am

SSJBartSimpson wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 9:15 pm I don't really know if there's much to discuss here, but if what you're doing is driving up your numbers and you're enjoying it there's no reason to change it. Personally, TM worked ok for me, BBM programming has worked better. I look forward to trying out other programs like ATS and Candito in the future.
Actually " if what you're doing is driving up your numbers and you're enjoying it there's no reason to change it" should be the first programming principle. More important than specificity, fatigue management, variation and all that stuff.

It always rubs me off the wrong way when people take something that works and then try to "prove" using "science" that it cannot work. For instance you'd see a guy deadlifting 600 lbs touch and go and then a bunch of nitwits will argue that touch and go deadlifts don't work. If they don't work how can the guy deadlift 600 lbs ? If it works it works, regardless of whether or not it is supposed to work.

Adams
Registered User
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2019 2:03 am

Re: Isn't all programming bullshit?

#46

Post by Adams » Mon Feb 20, 2023 4:00 am

CheekiBreekiFitness wrote: Mon Feb 20, 2023 2:21 am
SSJBartSimpson wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 9:15 pm I don't really know if there's much to discuss here, but if what you're doing is driving up your numbers and you're enjoying it there's no reason to change it. Personally, TM worked ok for me, BBM programming has worked better. I look forward to trying out other programs like ATS and Candito in the future.
Actually " if what you're doing is driving up your numbers and you're enjoying it there's no reason to change it" should be the first programming principle. More important than specificity, fatigue management, variation and all that stuff.

It always rubs me off the wrong way when people take something that works and then try to "prove" using "science" that it cannot work. For instance you'd see a guy deadlifting 600 lbs touch and go and then a bunch of nitwits will argue that touch and go deadlifts don't work. If they don't work how can the guy deadlift 600 lbs ? If it works it works, regardless of whether or not it is supposed to work.
This reminds me of when Eddie Hall did a video talking about his training. He talked about how he just worked up to one top set. Loads of people on Reddit were saying how bad his training was because he didn't do enough volume and that's the main diver for strength. His top set for squats was 345kg x 7! He probably did 3-6+ warm-up sets with more than their one-rep maxes. One of the world's strongest men had his training criticised by a bunch of novices because of some studies they read. :lol:

User avatar
CheekiBreekiFitness
Registered User
Posts: 684
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2022 3:46 am

Re: Isn't all programming bullshit?

#47

Post by CheekiBreekiFitness » Mon Feb 20, 2023 5:41 am

Adams wrote: Mon Feb 20, 2023 4:00 am
CheekiBreekiFitness wrote: Mon Feb 20, 2023 2:21 am
SSJBartSimpson wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 9:15 pm I don't really know if there's much to discuss here, but if what you're doing is driving up your numbers and you're enjoying it there's no reason to change it. Personally, TM worked ok for me, BBM programming has worked better. I look forward to trying out other programs like ATS and Candito in the future.
Actually " if what you're doing is driving up your numbers and you're enjoying it there's no reason to change it" should be the first programming principle. More important than specificity, fatigue management, variation and all that stuff.

It always rubs me off the wrong way when people take something that works and then try to "prove" using "science" that it cannot work. For instance you'd see a guy deadlifting 600 lbs touch and go and then a bunch of nitwits will argue that touch and go deadlifts don't work. If they don't work how can the guy deadlift 600 lbs ? If it works it works, regardless of whether or not it is supposed to work.
This reminds me of when Eddie Hall did a video talking about his training. He talked about how he just worked up to one top set. Loads of people on Reddit were saying how bad his training was because he didn't do enough volume and that's the main diver for strength. His top set for squats was 345kg x 7! He probably did 3-6+ warm-up sets with more than their one-rep maxes. One of the world's strongest men had his training criticised by a bunch of novices because of some studies they read. :lol:
Just imagine if Eddie followed the science ! He'd probably be close to a 2000 lbs deadlift in a year or two ! Is Eddie on Reddit ? Man we need to get him on Reddit asap.

And of course if you argue that well the guy is stronger than everybody else (literally as in he could lift more than any other human has ever lifted at one point in time) they'd just resort to the classic "well it's all drugs and genetics anyways !'.

Now I'm just making fun of people but I think the main problem is the following:
- the body is an immensely complex, adaptive system, and can be very unpredictable at the individual level
- response to any training program has extremely high variance
- most lifters, especially the so called "evidence based" would like to live in a world in which a few simple mathematical equations and basic principles allow you to predict response, and if we do enough studies of leg extensions on college students who can bench 225 then we will be able to find those basic principles and mathematical equations. The problem is: this is a fantasy, and complex adaptive systems cannot be modelled by a few simple equations, and certainly not by averaging over a random set of vaguely trained gym bros from the nearest frat house.

So those absurd situations are simply a result of their mind not being able to let go of this fantasy of control and predictability. They cannot bring themselves to realize that well we are mostly trying out things, taking notes and then switching it up when it stops working. Training is, unfortunately, not arithmetic and biomechanics.

Even myself, I really wished that I could buy that miraculous ebook that would just tell me everything I need to know about programming and then infinite gains would be mine, but the problem is that this is indeed just a fantasy.

User avatar
Hardartery
Registered User
Posts: 3107
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2020 6:28 pm
Location: Fat City

Re: Isn't all programming bullshit?

#48

Post by Hardartery » Mon Feb 20, 2023 10:30 am

CheekiBreekiFitness wrote: Mon Feb 20, 2023 5:41 am
Adams wrote: Mon Feb 20, 2023 4:00 am
CheekiBreekiFitness wrote: Mon Feb 20, 2023 2:21 am
SSJBartSimpson wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 9:15 pm I don't really know if there's much to discuss here, but if what you're doing is driving up your numbers and you're enjoying it there's no reason to change it. Personally, TM worked ok for me, BBM programming has worked better. I look forward to trying out other programs like ATS and Candito in the future.
Actually " if what you're doing is driving up your numbers and you're enjoying it there's no reason to change it" should be the first programming principle. More important than specificity, fatigue management, variation and all that stuff.

It always rubs me off the wrong way when people take something that works and then try to "prove" using "science" that it cannot work. For instance you'd see a guy deadlifting 600 lbs touch and go and then a bunch of nitwits will argue that touch and go deadlifts don't work. If they don't work how can the guy deadlift 600 lbs ? If it works it works, regardless of whether or not it is supposed to work.
This reminds me of when Eddie Hall did a video talking about his training. He talked about how he just worked up to one top set. Loads of people on Reddit were saying how bad his training was because he didn't do enough volume and that's the main diver for strength. His top set for squats was 345kg x 7! He probably did 3-6+ warm-up sets with more than their one-rep maxes. One of the world's strongest men had his training criticised by a bunch of novices because of some studies they read. :lol:
Just imagine if Eddie followed the science ! He'd probably be close to a 2000 lbs deadlift in a year or two ! Is Eddie on Reddit ? Man we need to get him on Reddit asap.

And of course if you argue that well the guy is stronger than everybody else (literally as in he could lift more than any other human has ever lifted at one point in time) they'd just resort to the classic "well it's all drugs and genetics anyways !'.

Now I'm just making fun of people but I think the main problem is the following:
- the body is an immensely complex, adaptive system, and can be very unpredictable at the individual level
- response to any training program has extremely high variance
- most lifters, especially the so called "evidence based" would like to live in a world in which a few simple mathematical equations and basic principles allow you to predict response, and if we do enough studies of leg extensions on college students who can bench 225 then we will be able to find those basic principles and mathematical equations. The problem is: this is a fantasy, and complex adaptive systems cannot be modelled by a few simple equations, and certainly not by averaging over a random set of vaguely trained gym bros from the nearest frat house.

So those absurd situations are simply a result of their mind not being able to let go of this fantasy of control and predictability. They cannot bring themselves to realize that well we are mostly trying out things, taking notes and then switching it up when it stops working. Training is, unfortunately, not arithmetic and biomechanics.

Even myself, I really wished that I could buy that miraculous ebook that would just tell me everything I need to know about programming and then infinite gains would be mine, but the problem is that this is indeed just a fantasy.
I have the equation, it's the super secret training method developed in a lab in Mythologistan by alchemists. You can send me the $19.95 payment for three months to recompense me for revealing it. Are you ready?
Super Secret Equation:
Train really hard to provide stimulus + recover sufficiently + eat enough clean calories = victory.
Remeber, that's 3 payments of $19.95.

User avatar
CheekiBreekiFitness
Registered User
Posts: 684
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2022 3:46 am

Re: Isn't all programming bullshit?

#49

Post by CheekiBreekiFitness » Mon Feb 20, 2023 11:43 am

Hardartery wrote: Mon Feb 20, 2023 10:30 am
CheekiBreekiFitness wrote: Mon Feb 20, 2023 5:41 am
Adams wrote: Mon Feb 20, 2023 4:00 am
CheekiBreekiFitness wrote: Mon Feb 20, 2023 2:21 am
SSJBartSimpson wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 9:15 pm I don't really know if there's much to discuss here, but if what you're doing is driving up your numbers and you're enjoying it there's no reason to change it. Personally, TM worked ok for me, BBM programming has worked better. I look forward to trying out other programs like ATS and Candito in the future.
Actually " if what you're doing is driving up your numbers and you're enjoying it there's no reason to change it" should be the first programming principle. More important than specificity, fatigue management, variation and all that stuff.

It always rubs me off the wrong way when people take something that works and then try to "prove" using "science" that it cannot work. For instance you'd see a guy deadlifting 600 lbs touch and go and then a bunch of nitwits will argue that touch and go deadlifts don't work. If they don't work how can the guy deadlift 600 lbs ? If it works it works, regardless of whether or not it is supposed to work.
This reminds me of when Eddie Hall did a video talking about his training. He talked about how he just worked up to one top set. Loads of people on Reddit were saying how bad his training was because he didn't do enough volume and that's the main diver for strength. His top set for squats was 345kg x 7! He probably did 3-6+ warm-up sets with more than their one-rep maxes. One of the world's strongest men had his training criticised by a bunch of novices because of some studies they read. :lol:
Just imagine if Eddie followed the science ! He'd probably be close to a 2000 lbs deadlift in a year or two ! Is Eddie on Reddit ? Man we need to get him on Reddit asap.

And of course if you argue that well the guy is stronger than everybody else (literally as in he could lift more than any other human has ever lifted at one point in time) they'd just resort to the classic "well it's all drugs and genetics anyways !'.

Now I'm just making fun of people but I think the main problem is the following:
- the body is an immensely complex, adaptive system, and can be very unpredictable at the individual level
- response to any training program has extremely high variance
- most lifters, especially the so called "evidence based" would like to live in a world in which a few simple mathematical equations and basic principles allow you to predict response, and if we do enough studies of leg extensions on college students who can bench 225 then we will be able to find those basic principles and mathematical equations. The problem is: this is a fantasy, and complex adaptive systems cannot be modelled by a few simple equations, and certainly not by averaging over a random set of vaguely trained gym bros from the nearest frat house.

So those absurd situations are simply a result of their mind not being able to let go of this fantasy of control and predictability. They cannot bring themselves to realize that well we are mostly trying out things, taking notes and then switching it up when it stops working. Training is, unfortunately, not arithmetic and biomechanics.

Even myself, I really wished that I could buy that miraculous ebook that would just tell me everything I need to know about programming and then infinite gains would be mine, but the problem is that this is indeed just a fantasy.
I have the equation, it's the super secret training method developed in a lab in Mythologistan by alchemists. You can send me the $19.95 payment for three months to recompense me for revealing it. Are you ready?
Super Secret Equation:
Train really hard to provide stimulus + recover sufficiently + eat enough clean calories = victory.
Remeber, that's 3 payments of $19.95.
Done. I sent 100$ because at 3 times 19.95$ it felt like robbing you. Can't wait to use the knowledge and become a muscular freak.

User avatar
Clearwater47
Registered User
Posts: 296
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2023 12:59 pm
Location: Minnesota, USA
Age: 49

Re: Isn't all programming bullshit?

#50

Post by Clearwater47 » Mon Feb 20, 2023 6:19 pm

I was looking for a new forum home to talk and read about training when the place I’ve been frequenting for years started really going downhill. Thought this felt like a good fit, and now I know it is after following this thread since it started up.

I had started writing an article a few months back that I was going to title “It ALL Works”. I’m not a writer, but felt it needed to be said at this former home as there was such a focus on programming - something which I had fallen prey to as well in the ongoing battle to get stronger.

It’s funny because the title is essentially the polar opposite of this thread’s, but the content was very much the same - programming is of lesser importance than the things that REALLY matter. I never actually finished or shared the article because I felt it would be a waste of my time and fall on deaf ears. I can’t even begin to express how much joy it brings me to have found some like minded individuals here.

I had never come across the ‘big plates’ approach before, but am likely going to give it a good solid shot when I resume training in a couple of weeks. Seems like it’s a good fit for my current schedule and goals, and will allow me to focus on things other than programming.

User avatar
DCR
Registered User
Posts: 3409
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2019 11:06 am
Location: Louisiana / New York
Age: 45

Re: Isn't all programming bullshit?

#51

Post by DCR » Mon Feb 20, 2023 7:10 pm

CheekiBreekiFitness wrote: Mon Feb 20, 2023 5:41 am
Adams wrote: Mon Feb 20, 2023 4:00 am
CheekiBreekiFitness wrote: Mon Feb 20, 2023 2:21 am
SSJBartSimpson wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 9:15 pm I don't really know if there's much to discuss here, but if what you're doing is driving up your numbers and you're enjoying it there's no reason to change it. Personally, TM worked ok for me, BBM programming has worked better. I look forward to trying out other programs like ATS and Candito in the future.
Actually " if what you're doing is driving up your numbers and you're enjoying it there's no reason to change it" should be the first programming principle. More important than specificity, fatigue management, variation and all that stuff.

It always rubs me off the wrong way when people take something that works and then try to "prove" using "science" that it cannot work. For instance you'd see a guy deadlifting 600 lbs touch and go and then a bunch of nitwits will argue that touch and go deadlifts don't work. If they don't work how can the guy deadlift 600 lbs ? If it works it works, regardless of whether or not it is supposed to work.
This reminds me of when Eddie Hall did a video talking about his training. He talked about how he just worked up to one top set. Loads of people on Reddit were saying how bad his training was because he didn't do enough volume and that's the main diver for strength. His top set for squats was 345kg x 7! He probably did 3-6+ warm-up sets with more than their one-rep maxes. One of the world's strongest men had his training criticised by a bunch of novices because of some studies they read. :lol:
Just imagine if Eddie followed the science ! He'd probably be close to a 2000 lbs deadlift in a year or two ! Is Eddie on Reddit ? Man we need to get him on Reddit asap.
I didn’t see this myself, but I recall seeing it mentioned here that, when Efferding was cross-promoting with Starting Strength for five minutes, the usual suspects were criticizing his squat technique. Sure he squatted literally 400 or so more lbs than them, in his fifties, but if only he did it their way, he’d have been even stronger.

ChasingCurls69
Registered User
Posts: 1511
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2017 1:43 am

Re: Isn't all programming bullshit?

#52

Post by ChasingCurls69 » Mon Feb 20, 2023 7:57 pm

CheekiBreekiFitness wrote: Mon Feb 20, 2023 2:21 am
SSJBartSimpson wrote: Sun Feb 19, 2023 9:15 pm I don't really know if there's much to discuss here, but if what you're doing is driving up your numbers and you're enjoying it there's no reason to change it. Personally, TM worked ok for me, BBM programming has worked better. I look forward to trying out other programs like ATS and Candito in the future.
Actually " if what you're doing is driving up your numbers and you're enjoying it there's no reason to change it" should be the first programming principle. More important than specificity, fatigue management, variation and all that stuff.

It always rubs me off the wrong way when people take something that works and then try to "prove" using "science" that it cannot work. For instance you'd see a guy deadlifting 600 lbs touch and go and then a bunch of nitwits will argue that touch and go deadlifts don't work. If they don't work how can the guy deadlift 600 lbs ? If it works it works, regardless of whether or not it is supposed to work.
Yeah, I think a lot of people get their wires crossed on this in both directions. There are a lot of programming styles and most of them follow the same basic principles, but you only have to do the one that works for you even if it violates the common "starting points" for programming based on those principles.

And then the other side of it is that doing a bunch of stuff and raw doge-ing various programming tweaks across a bunch of athletes gives you a shit ton of options to pull from and speeds up the process. But it has to start somewhere and so the basic principles are our best initial guess.

I think one of my favourite parts about coaching online has been fewer constraints with PT time or group class time, so I've had my stronger athletes take wildly different paths to get there based on their response and feedback, even though I have a certain style overall that's been influenced by BBM/RTS/DDS primarily in the last 5-6 years. And even my own coach is slightly different despite the same BBM/RTS influence.

AlanMackey
Registered User
Posts: 226
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2018 2:17 am

Re: Isn't all programming bullshit?

#53

Post by AlanMackey » Mon Feb 20, 2023 9:48 pm

Clearwater47 wrote: Mon Feb 20, 2023 6:19 pm I was looking for a new forum home to talk and read about training when the place I’ve been frequenting for years started really going downhill. Thought this felt like a good fit, and now I know it is after following this thread since it started up.

I had started writing an article a few months back that I was going to title “It ALL Works”. I’m not a writer, but felt it needed to be said at this former home as there was such a focus on programming - something which I had fallen prey to as well in the ongoing battle to get stronger.

It’s funny because the title is essentially the polar opposite of this thread’s, but the content was very much the same - programming is of lesser importance than the things that REALLY matter. I never actually finished or shared the article because I felt it would be a waste of my time and fall on deaf ears. I can’t even begin to express how much joy it brings me to have found some like minded individuals here.

I had never come across the ‘big plates’ approach before, but am likely going to give it a good solid shot when I resume training in a couple of weeks. Seems like it’s a good fit for my current schedule and goals, and will allow me to focus on things other than programming.
Now you owe us all an article.

User avatar
CheekiBreekiFitness
Registered User
Posts: 684
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2022 3:46 am

Re: Isn't all programming bullshit?

#54

Post by CheekiBreekiFitness » Tue Feb 21, 2023 12:59 am

@Clearwater47 You have said too much. Let's see that article !

User avatar
Clearwater47
Registered User
Posts: 296
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2023 12:59 pm
Location: Minnesota, USA
Age: 49

Re: Isn't all programming bullshit?

#55

Post by Clearwater47 » Tue Feb 21, 2023 4:46 am

Maybe I’ll revisit the article. I’m overseas visiting my partner’s family right now though, and won’t have access to my PC for a while.

janoycresva
Registered User
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2021 1:14 am

Re: Isn't all programming bullshit?

#56

Post by janoycresva » Thu Feb 23, 2023 10:51 am

KyleSchuant wrote: Wed Feb 15, 2023 10:10 pm
janoycresva wrote: Sat Feb 11, 2023 10:53 pm My injury rate is about the same on any programming I've tried with the exception of BBM templates, which maimed me every single time.
Satisfying our morbid curiosity, can you share how and why?
Adams wrote: Wed Feb 15, 2023 2:53 amI guess concentrating on sleeping, nutrition, consistency and working hard isn't as exciting as hoping the find the secret program that will help with gains.
Stevie P had a video on this once, where he says, "You know what, I've never seen a gym bro say to another, hey buddy, come here I'll tell you my training secret: I'm gonna lift some really heavy fucking weights and eat lots of good food for about ten fuckin' years and see if that builds any muscle, don't tell anyone, though."

As I said in Adams' thread, that ten years part is the hardest bit.
Ran their 12 week template twice, their hypertrophy 3-day template, and their powerbuilding template (original versions of all of these).

Hypertrophy 3 day didn't result in any injuries, but also didn't result in any progress. Powerbuilding template resulted in some knee tendonitis when volume ramped up, but nothing that bad. 12 week template was where I had the most trouble, I tried to be as honest with RPEs as possible but the program absolutely buried me both times, first time I tweaked something in my glute and the second time I injured my back pretty bad (messed with lifting for well over a year, re-tweaked several times).

As far as why, it's because those original templates had their RPEs set too high for the amount of volume, frequency, and specificity (for me). They're probably fine for people who are built better for s/b/d and s/b/d variations.

James
Registered User
Posts: 1275
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2019 5:26 am

Re: Isn't all programming bullshit?

#57

Post by James » Thu Feb 23, 2023 12:13 pm

BBM's original strength template supplemental work was a bit aggressive. I think the first four weeks of the main supplemental was 4@7,4@8,4@9 and -3% for two sets. Then switched to 1@8 with 2-4@9 repeated 2-3 sets no load drop prescribed. The lighter supplemental work was 10@7, 10@8, 10@9 for two sets no load drop and 8@6,8@7,8@8 for three sets also no load drop.

Not a meat grinder but I can see some people having problems with it.

alphagamma
Registered User
Posts: 160
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2018 10:24 pm

Re: Isn't all programming bullshit?

#58

Post by alphagamma » Fri Feb 24, 2023 8:13 am

janoycresva wrote: Thu Feb 23, 2023 10:51 am
KyleSchuant wrote: Wed Feb 15, 2023 10:10 pm
janoycresva wrote: Sat Feb 11, 2023 10:53 pm My injury rate is about the same on any programming I've tried with the exception of BBM templates, which maimed me every single time.
Satisfying our morbid curiosity, can you share how and why?
Adams wrote: Wed Feb 15, 2023 2:53 amI guess concentrating on sleeping, nutrition, consistency and working hard isn't as exciting as hoping the find the secret program that will help with gains.
Stevie P had a video on this once, where he says, "You know what, I've never seen a gym bro say to another, hey buddy, come here I'll tell you my training secret: I'm gonna lift some really heavy fucking weights and eat lots of good food for about ten fuckin' years and see if that builds any muscle, don't tell anyone, though."

As I said in Adams' thread, that ten years part is the hardest bit.
Ran their 12 week template twice, their hypertrophy 3-day template, and their powerbuilding template (original versions of all of these).

Hypertrophy 3 day didn't result in any injuries, but also didn't result in any progress. Powerbuilding template resulted in some knee tendonitis when volume ramped up, but nothing that bad. 12 week template was where I had the most trouble, I tried to be as honest with RPEs as possible but the program absolutely buried me both times, first time I tweaked something in my glute and the second time I injured my back pretty bad (messed with lifting for well over a year, re-tweaked several times).

As far as why, it's because those original templates had their RPEs set too high for the amount of volume, frequency, and specificity (for me). They're probably fine for people who are built better for s/b/d and s/b/d variations.
I had the exact same experience. The PL/strength program destroyed me. IIRC, it had a TM style VD 5x5 day for the Big 3 for the first 5 weeks, along with all the other supp lifts which were up to RPE 9. My lifts fell like 40kg+ and there was no point in continuing.

It was the same with the Bridge. In hindsight, BBM programs had way too much volume for me.
Last edited by alphagamma on Fri Feb 24, 2023 9:12 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
CheekiBreekiFitness
Registered User
Posts: 684
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2022 3:46 am

Re: Isn't all programming bullshit?

#59

Post by CheekiBreekiFitness » Fri Feb 24, 2023 8:33 am

@James If I were to run a template with prescriptions like that I'd just lower the rpe of the top set by 1 point and do 5% load drops for the back off sets like 5@6,7,8 load drop 5% do 2x5. Because I have already tried doing @9 on every exercise and it just doesn't work very well for me.

I can take almost any template, good or bad, for one person it'll be barely enough to progress, and for another person it'll destroy them and they won't last 3 weeks on the template. The problem is the fact that selling programming as templates is actually pretty terrible, and if people do sell templates, to the very minimum they should provide an accompanying procedure that teaches you how to modify the template based on response and training history (the overwhelming majority of template providers don't really do that). Sometimes people tell you "well you should modify the template as you go" but they don't really give you a process on how to do it, and it can be finicky. Of course things could be even worse like people telling you that "this template works for everyone all the time and if you don't get to a 600 squat with it then you should check your T levels" but I digress.

On the one hand the people who sell the templates want to sell the same thing to everybody, and on the other hand a lot of the people who do buy templates don't want to think for themselves, they want to plug in the numbers in a spreadsheet and write a program review 6 weeks later with their 1RMs. So I guess the fitness industry will keep selling templates and people will keep running them.

And I'm not writing this to say that I'm smarter than everyone, to the contrary, I find it quite difficult to be confident to take my own decisions in training, as opposed to just following some spreadsheet or whatever. I still have that secret fantasy that one day I'll download perfect spreadsheet i'll plug in my numbers and from then on it'll be 2 years of slow and steady gains to glory. No joke.

ChasingCurls69
Registered User
Posts: 1511
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2017 1:43 am

Re: Isn't all programming bullshit?

#60

Post by ChasingCurls69 » Fri Feb 24, 2023 7:47 pm

CheekiBreekiFitness wrote: Fri Feb 24, 2023 8:33 am @James If I were to run a template with prescriptions like that I'd just lower the rpe of the top set by 1 point and do 5% load drops for the back off sets like 5@6,7,8 load drop 5% do 2x5. Because I have already tried doing @9 on every exercise and it just doesn't work very well for me.

I can take almost any template, good or bad, for one person it'll be barely enough to progress, and for another person it'll destroy them and they won't last 3 weeks on the template. The problem is the fact that selling programming as templates is actually pretty terrible, and if people do sell templates, to the very minimum they should provide an accompanying procedure that teaches you how to modify the template based on response and training history (the overwhelming majority of template providers don't really do that). Sometimes people tell you "well you should modify the template as you go" but they don't really give you a process on how to do it, and it can be finicky. Of course things could be even worse like people telling you that "this template works for everyone all the time and if you don't get to a 600 squat with it then you should check your T levels" but I digress.

On the one hand the people who sell the templates want to sell the same thing to everybody, and on the other hand a lot of the people who do buy templates don't want to think for themselves, they want to plug in the numbers in a spreadsheet and write a program review 6 weeks later with their 1RMs. So I guess the fitness industry will keep selling templates and people will keep running them.

And I'm not writing this to say that I'm smarter than everyone, to the contrary, I find it quite difficult to be confident to take my own decisions in training, as opposed to just following some spreadsheet or whatever. I still have that secret fantasy that one day I'll download perfect spreadsheet i'll plug in my numbers and from then on it'll be 2 years of slow and steady gains to glory. No joke.
Agreed on those basic modifications to the early BBM templates. They worked for me at the time but I overshot a ton and they were harder than they had to be; they were just easier and more volume than TM so it was an improvement.

Post Reply