Would it be asinine to employ a “giant” set for the main lifts of the day during an OCTS training session? As an example, consider a isometric (stato-dynamic) day with
A. Zercher Squat
B. Push Press
C. Romanian Deadlift
then, if each consists of 3 preparation sets and 3 work sets I find it very appealing to skip the preparation sets on the RDL as I already feel “warm” and have a good idea for suitable weights. I wonder if, for me, a better option would be to do them as A1, A2, A3, but I understand there are implications neurologically perhaps most notably with motor pattern learning.
My question is: would your rather see a trainee giant set the three exercises or skip some prep sets on later exercises?
The preparation sets are done as the athlete needs them. Some will do more than I plan, others, less.
If I liked the idea of using the A1, A2… approach with the system, I’d have gone that way.
It actually feels good (and I do have systems using strength circuits) because it leads to a higher adrenaline increase than doing straight sets (constantly changing movement patterns requires a more activated CNS, which requires more adrenaline). But it comes at a cost (risk of beta-adrenergic desensitization).
The OCTS uses methods that are very demanding on the CNS by themselves, adding the circuit component might be too much.
But feel free to try it. When I give seminars I always start by saying that the last thing I want is to produce mini-Thibs. I provide info, but I encourage people to try things out.
I would make one recommendation though: don’t use rest periods that are so short that it becomes a conditioning workout.