Need brand new training regimen

Muscles hypertrophy in an effort to adapt to increased capacity. You can only add reps for a bit as the ranges here are fairly narrow. Strength must increase and it should be strength in the most stimulative lifts that drive adaptation in the organism.

If you lift weights, you are doing strength training. Maybe it's not for a single but it is to increase your capacity. BBing is not some different voodoo - they are simply increasing capacity in a slightly different range with less neural focus and feeding their body enough to put on muscle in response to the stimulus. Think of BBing as running the 45 rather than the 40. Instead of trying to hypothesize all kinds of garbage about the uniqueness of running the 45 and how a 45 sprinter is so different, they would benefit vastly from taking a look at the massive amount of knowledge accumulated regarding running the 40 and start applying it to get fast at the 45.

The bottom line is that what makes one fast in the 40 will carry you to very high levels in running the 45. Once you are at a fairly high level, understand your body, and have a solid foundation in training. Maybe then try to adapt your technique to give you that 2% edge in the 45.

I liked this quote - it is heavily sarcastic:

What a lot of strength athletes don't understand is that bodybuilding is totally different. A whole different type of hypertophy that requires vastly different exotic training methods that rarely get results and generally require anabolics to break 200lbs. Let me tell you all that building significant muscle mass on a Yoda-esque program using exotic rep schemes on cables and machines, days of dedicated biceps training, with an overbearing focus on trace mineral balance and insufficient caloric intake makes it really hard to put on muscle. These guys have to have it all together to show any appreciable gains.

Guys that eat and are able to rely on basic programs to increase their weights in squats, pulls, and presses doing basic exercises that strengthen the body and force it to adapt with increased muscle have it easy. They will never know what it's like to fight through moronic inefficiency to needlessly differentiate your training and alleviate worry that when you eventually do start gaining weight someday, it will be in perfect symmetry and proportion - all at 2lbs a year.

Click to expand...

super_rice said:

boardin... by "cycle" I do not mean drugs. That's the problem with people in our age group. I'm talking about your training. Look up the single factor 5x5 threads, they should help.

Click to expand...

lol!!!! i cought that in his post, and i was like, woah bro i dont think he meant that.

anyway, i like madcowx 5x5 and everybody else does too

Yeah, you juice-monster.


It's no wonder that many people in the gym equate any muscles out of the ordinary with drugs when we can't even discuss simple training without confusion.

Guinness5.0 said:

If someone were to run 6 IU's a day of HgH, 2 grams of test/week, a gram of deca and some tren, they could probably grow 20 inch arms with intense masterbation

Click to expand...

posted by someone who obviously knows nothing about drugs, and has never run any themselves...or maybe you are onto something, I can achieve my dreams of a pro card just by taking a ton of drugs, and nothing else, its just that easy

Guinness5.0 said:

I'm not trying to start an argument (from what I can tell we agree so far ), but it's tough to compare elite bb'ers with elite pl's if for no other reason than the vast role drugs play in both endeavors. As madcow has said repeatedly, bb'ers are big in spite of their training rather than because of it. If someone were to run 6 IU's a day of HgH, 2 grams of test/week, a gram of deca and some tren, they could probably grow 20 inch arms with intense masterbation

Click to expand...

I agree - not trying to argue. My concern is that while the 5x5 program is valid for strength and size - it is by no means the end all of strength programs. Plateaus will be met in all programs, along with some mental stagnation, not to mention that eventually - goals may change or another stimulus will be needed to elicit a response. A year or two ago it was HIT'ers all over this board espousing Mike Mentzer and blasting ANY other concept offered up. Now the board is in the 5x5 phase - which is a very valid system - but, again, is not the end all.

I mention Poliquin because I like the programs and results he has offered up in the past. Ian King is a favorite because of his programs addressing balance (front to back, top to bottom, left to right) and stabilizers. This is where my main question about 5x5 comes in - and no, I have not read each and every variation out there: How are issues of balance addressed? At some point unilateral excercises need to be brought in to ensure the body is not compensating for a weak limb or joint.

mekannik said:

This is where my main question about 5x5 comes in - and no, I have not read each and every variation out there: How are issues of balance addressed? At some point unilateral excercises need to be brought in to ensure the body is not compensating for a weak limb or joint.

Click to expand...

I think you have the wrong idea about programming and the Starr 5x5. The issue is that people are looking for "THE PROGRAM" when in fact all programs, even the best, are merely "A PROGRAM". You can't do the same thing forever. For a program to be the best choice at the time it has to address the individual's experience, tolerance, previous training, weak points, goal for the period, and still fit into the longer term goal. What is the best program for someone today might be a poor 8 weeks from now after they've acclimated to it or achieved whatever it was they were looking for.

If you look at the Starr 5x5 thread, the bulk of the TOC and everything added recently and waiting to be indexed doesn't concern that program but revolves around basic training and programing. The Starr 5x5 program is basically a foundation style program. Is it good at making you big and strong? Sure. Will it work forever if you just constantly run it as laid out again and again? Definitely not and diminishing returns will set it.

So where's the utility value? In addition to packing muscle on at a good rate by drastically increasing capacity in the core lifts, it serves to teach and illustrate. It allows people to easily grasp the nature of dual factor theory, breaks the BBing taboo of needing 7 days between bodyparts, and introduces the concepts of managing volume, intensity (%1RM), and frequency (all these coming together in wordload over a period). This doesn't mean that it only works once, or that it might not be the absolute best choice in a year for someone, or that they might not benefit from an extended period on such a program specifically if they've spent 90% of their time on a shotgun array of untargeted assistance work and not really focused on the core lifts for a long period.

Essentially what this does is get people thinking about planning a longer training cycle, or a macro style cycle that is tailored to their needs and managing it properly. It's just not enough to pick some exercises, lay them out by bodypart, and go in and work hard. Yeah, beginners and novices will do okay if the exercises are good but this is about taking intermediate and advanced lifters and making sure all 5 steps are forward - not 3 to the side, 1 back, and 1 forward.

Anyway, in this macro plan, ideally people will be constantly evaluating their needs and goals. A foudation style workout like the 5x5 might be run for 2 months; afterwhich a period of 4 weeks is devoted to targeted assistance work and a set of alternative exercises while maintaining the base; after that maybe a period of higher rep range work; and then followed by a series of concentrated and scaling cycles for a period; maybe some rest or speed work or whatever; then maybe the 5x5 or a derrivative again. Of course, all this time they are tailoring the macro layout to their needs as well as balancing the different meso/micro cycles to their own parameters.

This is training. Training is not some single program run linearly forever or changing up splits when they get stale. Training is a constant formula of optimization for an individual whether that be for a competition 8 months out or simply putting on as much muscle over the year as possible. Hell diet would be considered in all of these phases and if someone was drugged that would be accounted for too.

Anyway, most people come here looking to get big. Most come here spending far too much time on the little bullshit anyway that while alleviating their concern over growing out of symmetry certainly hasn't provided for much progress to where such measures would be needed. Most have never put serious time in the core lifts. The Starr 5x5 becomes a viable alternative - maybe the ideal one because we are pulling from a population that doesn't train anything like this so it tends to really work. It won't work forever and for optimum progress, they will have to learn to plan training. Maybe they do this. It seems quite a number have been down this path, are doing it now, and are making very steady consistent progress as they address their needs. Maybe it's HST, DFHT, WSB, BS5x5, even a HIT based program (just a period nothing crazy) or better yet, pulling from these and learning how to manage it on their own.

That is training and that is the goal. The BS 5x5 is just an introductory program to get them moving.

Lift for strength at the beginning of your workout (1 compound exercise w/ incremental progression, 3-5 sets and 5-8 reps), then progress to endurance (2-3 compound+isolation exercises for 2-5 sets and 8-12 reps). Aim to achieve conditioning in both areas.

Madcow2 said:

... You can't do the same thing forever. For a program to be the best choice at the time it has to address the individual's experience, tolerance, previous training, weak points, goal for the period, and still fit into the longer term goal. What is the best program for someone today might be a poor 8 weeks from now after they've acclimated to it or achieved whatever it was they were looking for.

Click to expand...

That is the first time I have read this response (and no - I did not or will not go back and search past threads for this explanation). I concur completely that you can not run "a program" indefinately. Part of the body growing is adapting to different stimuli.

The point from my last post was to make sure the idea of balance is kept in mind to avoid long term injury and to promote a better quality physique. That and strength is not dependent on muscle size alone.


Oh, and Ian King and Poliquin also note that their programs are meant for one or two "cycles" per year at the most. So the idea of continuous back to back runnings of the same program is addressed.

I think we are on the same page. A few times lately people have got it into their heads that I am out there saying the Starr 5x5 is "the program" or the only way to train - when in fact that's never been my contention and that's kind of the antithesis of what I've been trying to do. It was more of a general rant than directed at you.

Being one of the first on here to run the madcow/Starr 5x5 I think it's worth my chipping in that I never gained any impression that I was taking out a lifetime subscription to the program. I always took it as madcow just described: an alternative way of looking at training to the standard once-a-week-to-repeated-failure method that I was using and starting to feel disillusionment with. I've not seen the program presented as anything else.