Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
Modified 5x5 squat cycle article
- Thread starter coolcolj
- Start date
anotherbutters
New member
I'm not impressed. He doesn't say which 5x5 program he's modifying. It might not even relate to the 5x5's currently popular here. He lists the sets, reps and intensity for 4 weeks, but doesn't say how many workouts you're supposed to do per week. From the basic template example he gives, it looks like he intends people squat just once per week with only one additional workout during the week.
Thanks for posting. But, um, no thanks
Thanks for posting. But, um, no thanks
Cynical Simian
New member
^^^Agreed. It seems like another gimmicky "improvement" of the deficiencies in some random routine that happens to use 5 sets of 5 reps designed to appeal to the guys who think they need an ultra-complex routine or some magic exercise to get strong/big.
BiggT
New member
Cynical Simian said:
If it weren't for those guys, T-nation wouldn't have a discussion board, lol.....seriously, that place could probably tell you how to combine calculus and trigonometry to solve 1 plus 1......
Intermediate lifters do NOT need wave loading and %'s (in the sexed-up senses that t-nation presents them), and I heard of a guy who trains AT Westside Barbell who did guess what to bring up his bench after an injury before he get into the traditional ME rotation??? none other than 5x5.........don't complicate that which does not need to be complicated..... but I won't turn this into a rant, lol.
anotherbutters
New member
yeah, I can see it's in a different format and there's some attempt at periodisation, but there's no volume there.
Cynical Simian
New member
Um, nobody missed the fact that it was a dual-factor program. In fact, we were criticizing it because a program focusing on driving up the core lifts with explicit periodization and a lot of assistance work is just going to dilute the progress of "intermediate lifters", as the author defines them:coolcolj said:
BiggT
New member
With all due respect, I feel I have learned a little bit the past 14 years I've spent under the bar. The program in that article has nothing to do with classic '5x5' progression the way that a Bill Starr template does.
I really think the author sounds like he is clueless about the '5x5'.....the one Bill Starr popularized after being influenced by Doug Hepburn, and the one that Mark Ripptoe and Glenn Pendlay use with much success today with their lifters.......the only thing the author's program has in common with Starr's version is the word 'squat' and the number '5'.
I still feel that fixed %'s in training are an inefficient and overcomplicated way to train for anybody who is capable of increasing a lift by at least 10% a year......I've back squatted 3 times a week, and I have used a more than 315 each workout I didn't have any problems overtraining.....neither do any of the olympic lifters who squat a hell of a lot more than me and a hell of a lot more often......the problem with people 'overtraining' on a 5x5 is that they use poor weight selection and burn themselves out, then blame the routine, plus if you use a PL squat, they tend to be more unforgiving on your recovery than an olympic or front squat.
But really, all that routine looks like to me is an experienced lifter kind of 'played it by ear' for a month and got good results, then went back over his journal to make some sense of it.
I really think the author sounds like he is clueless about the '5x5'.....the one Bill Starr popularized after being influenced by Doug Hepburn, and the one that Mark Ripptoe and Glenn Pendlay use with much success today with their lifters.......the only thing the author's program has in common with Starr's version is the word 'squat' and the number '5'.
I still feel that fixed %'s in training are an inefficient and overcomplicated way to train for anybody who is capable of increasing a lift by at least 10% a year......I've back squatted 3 times a week, and I have used a more than 315 each workout
I didn't have any problems overtraining.....neither do any of the olympic lifters who squat a hell of a lot more than me and a hell of a lot more often......the problem with people 'overtraining' on a 5x5 is that they use poor weight selection and burn themselves out, then blame the routine, plus if you use a PL squat, they tend to be more unforgiving on your recovery than an olympic or front squat.But really, all that routine looks like to me is an experienced lifter kind of 'played it by ear' for a month and got good results, then went back over his journal to make some sense of it.
BiggT said:
Well, he admits that a normal 5x5 didn't work as well as he had hoped. It would be fair to say that if a 5x5 works well for 95% of the population, there's still that 5% that needs to find something more effective. To his credit he warns readers that chances are if they're dissatisfied with their present program it's because they are faulty in their application.
I'm not a fan of the way he's set things up, either. Our opinions are from a personal standpont, though. He clearly says this program is totally based on what worked for him.
I'll agree the article has it's amount of made-for-publication posturing, but it's always interesting for me to read of people's successful experiences using non-standard techniques. It helps refine your own thinking, even if it only serves to ultimately reinforce your present training methodology.
Hey guys...new to the board here. I actually enjoyed the article. It's basically a 4 day upper/lower body split. You train the squat early in the week and train a similar movement the next lower body training day. You use the assistance exercises to bring up the main lift which is the squat. I think it just depends on what method you prefer. Most beginners just need to squat,bench, and deadlift with increased frequency to bring up said lifts. On the other hand, you have those(and everyone is different) that need to add special exercises to bring up their lifts. For examples in weightlifting the Russians believed in using lots of exercises to bring up the competition lifts and the Bulgarians basically used just the competition lifts and squats with increased frequency to bring up the lifts. For a beginner I would recommend the "Bulgarian method" if you will, and then it comes to a point where they need to do something extra to bring up their lifts. That is where the "Russian Method" would come in. In powerlifting, "The Westside method" is based basically off the Russian method of using different exercises to bring up the competition lifts. In contrast, Metal Militia uses the Bulgarian method of increased frequency and high intensity with unloading periods inserted. Different ways to achieve the same results. I'll try to find a link that I have somewhere around here going into more detail.
Here is the post I was talking about. I took out a few paragraphs from a cut n paste job to keep the meat n taters. Not 100% sure, but I think some of this is coming from Glenn Pendlay....couldn't be sure though.
I was talking to someone today about weightlifting training vs powerlifting training, and something kind of stuck in my mind... the differences and similarities of the evolution of training in each sport. in weightlifting, many of the best lifters of the 50's trained mainly on the competitive lifts, doing snatches, clean and jerks and squats 3 or 4 days a week, going relatively light for a few weeks, then ramping up for several weeks of hard training, then going back down again for several weeks of light training... the soviets changed this in the 70's (well, not just the soviets, but i suppose they were the most vocal about the new training style) and began planning more long term, and employing more assistance exercises, culminating in a training style where the lifter spent very little time on the competition exercises, and rarely did maximums on them outside competition, but did many, many different assistance exercises designed to improve the competition lifts, and changed these assistance exercises often. now, we have largely turned back to the "old style" of training, this was started by the bulgarians, just do the snatch and the clean and jerk, and squat, and do these things heavy and often, and progress slowly to doing them even heavier and even more often...
in powerlifting, it seems a similar thing has happened, though not quite following the same timeline. most lifters up to the early 90's it seems trained the same way OLers did in the 50's, except for doing the lifts less often. just the basics, squat, bench, deadlift, with maybe some close grip benches or shrugs or leg presses, but most of all just heavy work on the competition lifts. of course louie brought powerlifting in the 90's to the same place where OL was in the 70's, de-emphasising the competitive lifts and concentrating on assistance exercises, and also just like OLing in the 70's, increasing the overall workload. however, it seems that now, people are starting to go back to more work on the actuall competitive lifts, for example, it seems to me that most of the best benchers no longer follow the formula that louie preached 5 or 10 years ago of only wearing a shirt in a meet and only benching heavy in a meet, it seems that many of the best wear their shirt and bench heavy in it every week, doing things just like they would do in competition on a regular basis.
so it would seem to me that exercise selection and whether your training style emphasises the competitive lifts or assistance exercises isnt the most important variable when it comes to successfull training. ill agree that bands and chains and the 100 versions of the good morning are fun and can help break plateaus, but in reality, the strength levels of the best powerlifters havent increased signigicantly since we all started using these things. likewise in OL, we argue about whether to use the soviet or bulgarian models, but in reality, both have produced comparable athletes.
I should tell everyone that Glenn and I were talking about something very closely related to this issue already about a month ago. So I'm sort of repeating a lot of what he told me then, but for the benefit of everyone else here now.
To be a good strength athlete, you pretty much need good neural efficiency with your competitive lifts, and the muscles that are going to be doing all that work really do need to be pretty big.
Do not both styles of training (Russian/WSB versus Bulgarian/Milita) accomplish this?
For OLing and PLing with Russian training and WSB respectively, using the conjugate method, you develop your neural ability with lots of dynamic and max effort work. With Bulgarian and Militia training, we'll call it 'direct training' for now I guess, you develop this ability through lots of repetitive practice with the competition lifts...for hours and hours per training session. Just different methods of achieving the same result...a highly 'peaked' degree of neural strength.
But you can't just be peaked...you can't get away from myofibril hypertrophy of the muscle groups that are going to be doing all this work. To do this with the conjugate method you need lots of volume with difficult weight. Glenn called this, "real gut busting sets"..."boring and really hard". Stuff like 6 sets of 4, or 5 sets of 5, or 4 sets of 10 with weight that is difficult...like around 80% of your max. The Russians did lots of variations of pulls and jerks to accomplish this, and WSB guys do a lot of GHRs, rows, dumbell presses, and goodmornings. The "direct training" camp gets all this volume straight from the huge amount of competitive lifts that they practice. No one is going to accuse the Bulgarians or the Militia of using anything but a lot of volume. And these of course work the necessary muscles because the lifts are mostly the competitive lifts (with a few exceptions). Again, its just a different way of achieving the same goal.
As long as you are efficient and big (big enough), isn't exercise selection really a moot point? After all, the lifts you do in the gym are really only one training variable...if all the other variables are similar...is your training really that different?
This is more Glenn regurgetation coming at you...I hope he doesn't mind too much.
You need to get lots of work in at the 80% range, with multiple sets of multiple reps. 5x5 is an easy way to do it...but 6x4 or 4x10 seems to work really well too. Just keep the weight on the barbell the same for all of the sets. For example, warm up with the barbell by itself, than do 5 sets of 5 reps of 225 for Romanian deadlifts.
I know you train mostly WSB style Susan...so for your assistance stuff, if adding more weight is your gameplan, than do your GHRs and rows and JM presses for a bunch of sets with the same weight on the bar...and make sure its hard. Don't train to failure! But make sure that its difficult weight.
I was talking to someone today about weightlifting training vs powerlifting training, and something kind of stuck in my mind... the differences and similarities of the evolution of training in each sport. in weightlifting, many of the best lifters of the 50's trained mainly on the competitive lifts, doing snatches, clean and jerks and squats 3 or 4 days a week, going relatively light for a few weeks, then ramping up for several weeks of hard training, then going back down again for several weeks of light training... the soviets changed this in the 70's (well, not just the soviets, but i suppose they were the most vocal about the new training style) and began planning more long term, and employing more assistance exercises, culminating in a training style where the lifter spent very little time on the competition exercises, and rarely did maximums on them outside competition, but did many, many different assistance exercises designed to improve the competition lifts, and changed these assistance exercises often. now, we have largely turned back to the "old style" of training, this was started by the bulgarians, just do the snatch and the clean and jerk, and squat, and do these things heavy and often, and progress slowly to doing them even heavier and even more often...
in powerlifting, it seems a similar thing has happened, though not quite following the same timeline. most lifters up to the early 90's it seems trained the same way OLers did in the 50's, except for doing the lifts less often. just the basics, squat, bench, deadlift, with maybe some close grip benches or shrugs or leg presses, but most of all just heavy work on the competition lifts. of course louie brought powerlifting in the 90's to the same place where OL was in the 70's, de-emphasising the competitive lifts and concentrating on assistance exercises, and also just like OLing in the 70's, increasing the overall workload. however, it seems that now, people are starting to go back to more work on the actuall competitive lifts, for example, it seems to me that most of the best benchers no longer follow the formula that louie preached 5 or 10 years ago of only wearing a shirt in a meet and only benching heavy in a meet, it seems that many of the best wear their shirt and bench heavy in it every week, doing things just like they would do in competition on a regular basis.
so it would seem to me that exercise selection and whether your training style emphasises the competitive lifts or assistance exercises isnt the most important variable when it comes to successfull training. ill agree that bands and chains and the 100 versions of the good morning are fun and can help break plateaus, but in reality, the strength levels of the best powerlifters havent increased signigicantly since we all started using these things. likewise in OL, we argue about whether to use the soviet or bulgarian models, but in reality, both have produced comparable athletes.
I should tell everyone that Glenn and I were talking about something very closely related to this issue already about a month ago. So I'm sort of repeating a lot of what he told me then, but for the benefit of everyone else here now.
To be a good strength athlete, you pretty much need good neural efficiency with your competitive lifts, and the muscles that are going to be doing all that work really do need to be pretty big.
Do not both styles of training (Russian/WSB versus Bulgarian/Milita) accomplish this?
For OLing and PLing with Russian training and WSB respectively, using the conjugate method, you develop your neural ability with lots of dynamic and max effort work. With Bulgarian and Militia training, we'll call it 'direct training' for now I guess, you develop this ability through lots of repetitive practice with the competition lifts...for hours and hours per training session. Just different methods of achieving the same result...a highly 'peaked' degree of neural strength.
But you can't just be peaked...you can't get away from myofibril hypertrophy of the muscle groups that are going to be doing all this work. To do this with the conjugate method you need lots of volume with difficult weight. Glenn called this, "real gut busting sets"..."boring and really hard". Stuff like 6 sets of 4, or 5 sets of 5, or 4 sets of 10 with weight that is difficult...like around 80% of your max. The Russians did lots of variations of pulls and jerks to accomplish this, and WSB guys do a lot of GHRs, rows, dumbell presses, and goodmornings. The "direct training" camp gets all this volume straight from the huge amount of competitive lifts that they practice. No one is going to accuse the Bulgarians or the Militia of using anything but a lot of volume. And these of course work the necessary muscles because the lifts are mostly the competitive lifts (with a few exceptions). Again, its just a different way of achieving the same goal.
As long as you are efficient and big (big enough), isn't exercise selection really a moot point? After all, the lifts you do in the gym are really only one training variable...if all the other variables are similar...is your training really that different?
This is more Glenn regurgetation coming at you...I hope he doesn't mind too much.
You need to get lots of work in at the 80% range, with multiple sets of multiple reps. 5x5 is an easy way to do it...but 6x4 or 4x10 seems to work really well too. Just keep the weight on the barbell the same for all of the sets. For example, warm up with the barbell by itself, than do 5 sets of 5 reps of 225 for Romanian deadlifts.
I know you train mostly WSB style Susan...so for your assistance stuff, if adding more weight is your gameplan, than do your GHRs and rows and JM presses for a bunch of sets with the same weight on the bar...and make sure its hard. Don't train to failure! But make sure that its difficult weight.
