Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
Research Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsResearch Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic

Time to throw out Bill Starr's 5x5 routine.

LoneTree

New member
Background: Bill Starr was a strength coach who wrote a book about 'STRENGTH' training of 'FOOTBALL PLAYERS' in !!!!! 1970's !!!!!
Even at that time, it might have not been fully relevant to body builkders.
More importantly, research has moved too far since 1970's. It is now out-dated, and plainly wrong.

WHAT IS A 'SET'?
My first disagreement: By definition, a set is to failure (or when you feel you can't do one more full repetition). If it is not to failure, it is not a set.
There are similar techniques offered by others that do not take set to failoure.
The most distinguished researchers with American Society of Sports Medicine has called those 'sets' as 'warm ups', 'wastage of time', and resulting in little benefit.

I will take next point in my next thread.
 
?
yes and surely you, Mr.Nobody are vastly more experienced with Strength training then Bill Star
and 5x5's I'm sure have been less benificial then your 'techniques' which I have no doubt will be regugitated HIT nonsence that is in no way orgional to you...
a Set is not defined by going to failure it is only ignorant to say it is
but then what can be expected from someone saying to throw out the 5x5 routine
 
Burn the troll.

You made no point, here, Lonetree. You merely told us that you don't think a set is a set. I think you need a fresh set of 'distinguished researchers' since your current crop is rubbish.

I hope you're not planning to spam us with a series of these vacuous threads.
 
"Outdated"? Perhaps you can enlighten on on the latest, cutting-edge methods. Maybe doing dumbell presses on a swissball.....Oh yeah, take a well trained athlete and put them on HIT, see how weak they get.
 
real world experience has proven time and time again that the 5x5 is an amazing program, and that typicaly programs like you describe only succeed due to amazing diet dedication and training that is unnecesarily hard. You can train less hard using periodization and gain better than going all out to failure all of the time.
 
LoneTree said:
More importantly, research has moved too far since 1970's. It is now out-dated, and plainly wrong.
If something worked in the 70's, it'll work now. I don't think evolution has affected humans that much in 30 years :rolleyes:
WHAT IS A 'SET'?
My first disagreement: By definition, a set is to failure (or when you feel you can't do one more full repetition). If it is not to failure, it is not a set.
You're kidding, right? A set is a series of reps- there's no distinction based on momentary muscular failure.
There are similar techniques offered by others that do not take set to failoure.
The most distinguished researchers with American Society of Sports Medicine has called those 'sets' as 'warm ups', 'wastage of time', and resulting in little benefit.
Hmmm....

I will take next point in my next thread.
Should be a real gem.

Bro you are clueless
 
Blut Wump said:
Burn the troll.

You made no point, here, Lonetree. You merely told us that you don't think a set is a set. I think you need a fresh set of 'distinguished researchers' since your current crop is rubbish.

I hope you're not planning to spam us with a series of these vacuous threads.


LOL, BW, why don't you tell us how you really feel. :)

I have a lot more respect for Bill Starr than some newb troll.
 
Top Bottom