I’m convinced that not deadlifting at all is not a good way to train the deadlift, but seeing as you are recommending singles with 85% that isn’t in conflict with your opinion at all. I don’t understand what all the commotion is about.
I haven’t been in space or circumnavigated the globe, but I don’t believe that the earth is flat. Am I not entitled to that opinion?
Have you ever tried Smolov? Do you need to try that program to see why it could be a problem? I’m basing my opinion of no-deadlift training off the opinion of others who have not only tried it but also trained many elite lifters, such as Louie Simmons. At Westside Barbell there was a time that they rarely deadlifted at all and instead use various box squats, good mornings, GHRs, reverse hypers, and so on to train the muscles involved but very rarely did any form of deadlift. Dave Tate has articles talking about this and mentioned that he hated deadlifting, even though it was his best lift, so he was glad to not deadlift in training. However, they didn’t have particularly good results in the deadlift with that training method so in more recent times have started doing speed pulls on a weekly basis as well as more frequent max effort deadlift variations. So it’s not like I’m just making things up and telling you how I imagine it to be, I am reiterating the opinion of one of the most successful coaches in the sport who has experimented with many different methods over the years.
I think everyone should try Smolov at least once in their life, along with daily squatting, and 20 rep squats (as long as they are able bodied with minimal to no injuries). None of them may work for you, but they may be the best thing you have ever tried. Just looking at something on paper and saying “That’s dumb, why would anyone do that” when it has boosted many of people’s squat pre-contest is preposterous.
Some people make great gains off Smolov and one guy even set an IPF single ply squat record. But those people are few compared to the many who burned out or got injured. For someone with an incredible work capacity, or maybe someone who just started using steroids, perhaps the program is feasible. But looking at the volume combined with intensity and the unrealistic progression rate, there is no way I would be able to make it through the program, much less recover and make gains so I would be a fool to try it.
It’s interesting that this argument started with you objecting to my stance against no-deadlift training, despite the fact that you yourself recommend deadlifting for singles with 85%. So I would have to try the program which you don’t even recommend before I am qualified to speak against it.
Another question, how would you train the Deadlift if the goal is to get as many reps as possible at a certain weight or percentage ? Let’s say your max Deadlift is 100lbs and you want to get as many reps at possible with 80 lbs.
So for a regular guy like me with a 280 lb deadlift, would I be better off performing standard deadlifts infrequently and doing the majority of training with complementary movements (trap bar deadlift RDLs heavy swings rack pulls etc)?
I don’t think I am. Your counter-argument has no foundation to stand on, because you have no practical experience in the subject, other than second hand information. It’s akin to trying to learn how to play the game of football from a Sunday armchair quarterback, rather than learning from an experienced coach on the practice field.
Again, I think I do, as I said exactly this in my first reply to you. I think you are coming from a versus perspective of all things being equal, which they never are, from individual to individual and not factoring in variables, other than frequency, volume and intensity. The main reason someone would consider low frequency deadlifting in the first place is recoverability, age, profession, etc. Maybe, I am an outlier, but I tend to disagree with the statement that we are more alike, than not, as said above. I would agree, that this may be the case in the beginning for a lifter, but once you get past the initial begginer phase, I think you need to start figuring out what type of lifter you are, as far as red vs white fiber ratio, tolerance, what you respond to, etc. It’s like someone telling me that if I wanted to gain mass to stick to a 3x10@70% of 1rm for example. From experience, I know that it will do jack shit for me, other than accumulate alot of metabolic fatigue and drive me into a recovery deficit. I will get more out of 10x3 or even a 5x5@80-85% in terms of hypertrophy, get stronger in the process, as well as keep accumulated fatigue manageable. Tolerance is the name of the game, when it comes to frequency. It should be the first variable considered, when writing your programs. Telling everyone that 2-3 times a week anything is optimal is incorrect and working backwards.
Which is why I am learning from Westside Barbell and Louie Simmons rather than experimenting with a method that very few people have had success with. And I encourage others to learn from Louie Simmons as well. Even Kenny, who has used the method, still recommends deadlifting for singles with 85%.
Regarding frequency, have you ever tried squatting and benching 6 days a week? If not, then by your logic you are not qualified to speak on the topic. I never said that everyone should squat and bench at least twice a week, I said that the majority of people should do so. Don’t you weigh over 300 lbs? That advice wouldn’t apply to you. And you still don’t appear to understand what I’m saying.
So if you wanted to increase frequency you would do 3-4 sets of 3, 3 times a week, 5 sets of 3 twice a week, or 2-3 sets of 5 twice a week. It’s that simple. If you don’t like it or you don’t think it will work for you then feel free to do something else. Most people who can’t handle benching twice a week are benching over 500, are you one of them?
All we can and are doing here on this forum is offer perspectives from our own personal experience with ourselves or people that some of us may have personally trained or trained with. Without that experience, it is impossible to offer an accurate assessment. To answer your question, no, but I have tried squatting and benching 3 times a week and that was too much, as well as twice a week, so I dare not even try 6 times a week. Reading all the literature out here today, you would think my technique would fall to shit, my strength would drop and I would wither away only squatting and pulling twice a month. I put very little stock into what is written or studies. I still find it interesting and if I find it that interesting I will experiment with it for myself.
I’ve done something similar with dup. Like you said before, it is time consuming and a pain in the ass. It also, doesn’t fit my personality. And no, I wish.
I’m not really arguing, just trying to offer perspective from my experience and I see 20 rep squats and daily squatting as short term challenges, rather than a long term. Sure, if I had an endurance event I had to prepare for I would sway towards that spectrum of training for special strengths, but im not and we’re in the powerlifting forum. As for Smolov, I know very little about it, so I don’t know.
These experts have a track record of proven success, their methods sometimes going against the norm and sometimes setting it. Both have extensive practical experience yet draw heavily from the decades of research since the inception of sports performance as a science.
They’ve surely tried out a lot of stuff between them and discarded what is ineffective. I find it hard to believe they have not once come across training ideas/methods that they discarded with no hesitation without even trying it. They knew enough and took the time to apply that knowledge hypothetically to potential strategies and concluded that they would be less effective then what they were currently running.
I think it’s not so much loss of gains but loss of potential gains or rate of gains nomsayin that have people trying to find the very best way to train, resulting in a clusterfuck of info. The adage goes “if it aint broke don’t fix it”. Some people postface this with “If it’s not perfect it may as well be broken.”
Frankly for something little like a 10-20% difference it may not be worth the headache/effort. Tho if you train for years/decades a 10-20% difference in rate of gains may mean getting to any given point a year or more faster. Looking at it the other way around potentially wasting a year of your life sounds pretty unappealing.
Agree with this 100%. And paralysis by analysis. At some point you just have to follow your instinct. Instinct comes from experience. Otherwise, all we can do is speculate or hopefully draw on others that have been down that road. Speaking of Westside, have you read article on elite f t s “The One-Drop Method”?
Lel…um that wasn’t exactly what I was on about tho
Point was that with reasonable accuracy you can and probably should look at something and determine it’s likely effectiveness through the scope of the principles of strength training e.g. specificity, overload, fatigue management etc. Instinct has less to do with the analysis.
Take Smolov above for example: High weekly volume often at high percentages generates loads of fatigue. Even following the recommendations that one should not deadlift at all and be in a caloric surplus during Smolov it’ll beat most people into the ground leading to high burnout/dropout rate and increased incidence of injury. If you survive you’ll almost certainly be hitting PRs tho
These were my thoughts before doing Smolov.
It was hard/fun and PRed 40lbs easy by the end of it but got cranky quadriceps tendonitis too (went away after a few weeks when I returned to more reasonable training). I didn’t drop out although to be fair I did not do all of the prescribed volume (most tho. I aint no lil bitch) but I could definitely see the program being inappropriate for most lifters many of who’d end up dropping out.
My “before” thoughts and “after” experiences were more or less aligned which was not surprising because I had a good hard think before doing the program.
I’m one of those who tends to over analyse things probably because I actually enjoy it and the process. I’ve learnt, drawn ideas and inspiration from so many sources that it’d be hard to list them all.
For most people or in general I’d recommend a more healthy balance than my own between doing what works/has worked for you/others personally and keeping open minded lest an opportunity to enhance your training comes around.
