Hi, will be rational when I publish my new training with a deliberate focus on the bench press. I have calculated lifts, tonnage and RI (relative intensity). I will publish these fundamental quantities gradually in my log. The goal is flagrant - improvement of the bench press.
Why does it last for 24 weeks? Based on a fairly simple fact: The USSR has countless very detailed researches, the results of which have come to the conclusion that the most effective training (for lifters) are long-lasting strength waves. I also take the view that frequent training with 90% of RM or frequent testing of personal records is totally useless and very risky. I’m not a Russian, but I believe in the Russian training methods.
You must have missed his other thread, he is basically specializing in the bench press and not really pushing the other two. And he is using Russian-style programming, discussing assistance work is pretty much irrelevant.
I think it depends on what you are accustomed to and what sort of PRs you are going for. Testing your 1rm on a regular basis is not really a bright idea, aside from injury risk you also accumulate a lot of fatigue and it will slow your progress. Rep PRs or non-maximal singles (assuming you have gotten so much stronger that 5-10lbs over you old 1rm is no longer a max) is not really risky as long as you don’t push too close to failure and you are used to that style of training. If your rarely go over 80% in training and do mostly 3’s and 2’s then you could be asking for trouble if you go for a rep max or a singe that is well above the weights you have handled recently.
Personally, I have blocks of training where I work up to a single at about 90-95% of my 1rm and then do volume work after. It’s an effective way to peak for a meet and makes the weights at the meet seem much less intimidating. Also, Sheiko has mentioned that the max effort method (which they define as lifts at 90%+ of 1rm) is the most effective way of increasing strength, he just doesn’t use it due to the perceived injury risk. However, there was a copy of a training cycle that he wrote for Yuri Fedorenko (no longer available from what I can see) that did include days with multiple singles on the competition lifts.
Mike Tuchscherer made a recent post on Facebook on this, in response to Boris Sheiko advising against such methods, it’s worth checking out. Here’s a couple of excerpts:
“There’s nothing special about 90% loads that makes them especially taxing to the lifter. It’s the high psychological arousal that is highly taxing. And it’s not hard to see that if you look at the context. Coach Sheiko plans the bulk of his training loads in the 70-85% range. They go beyond 85% once in a training cycle usually. So for them, a single at 90% or 95% is heavier than they’ve gone in several months. So even loading that on the bar is going to get their heart pumping and palms sweating a little. Yes, in this case the 90% load will be more stressful, but it’s because of the psychological arousal. It’s because the athlete isn’t used to it.
On the other hand, there are coaches like me who frequently program x1 at 8RPE which works out to be 92-93% typically. My athletes can handle this every week and show no signs of the dreaded “overtraining”. In the very beginning (first couple of weeks), they will be a bit stressed out by the experience, but after a while, it becomes normal.”
“Training with these loads provides several benefits to the lifters. It’s highly, highly specific. It’s training the competition lift with loads that will be seen in competition. If the lifter is adequately prepared for this from a technical standpoint, then this provides a great training value. The movements and loads are similar to what is faced in competition. The athlete can expect to improve the finer points of technical execution as they gain experience at higher loads. They can improve the neural aspects of strength as well – tightness, positioning, inter/intra muscular coordination, rate coding, etc. It is sport form development – improvements in strength and technical proficiency at the loads that matter most.”
On the other hand, if you have a different style of training that works for you then you can stick with it. I don’t know how to write an effective program in the Russian style so I do what I know.
I think it’s most effective in isolation (as in not considering the rest of the program), similar to training to failure for hypertrophy. If you are only going to do one set then it better be over 90% or pushed to failure, but of course you can do more than one set. That’s not to say that ME is bad, but it’s appropriate for certain people at certain times.
The psychological arousal with Heavy (relative to my strength, so light for you) part is no joke.
Sometimes squatting I get worried, my walk-out gets all squirley, and my feet won’t stop shuffling around.
I heard some runner guys say they were afraid to start a friendly 3 man, no pressure race.
Also, if the training is built around hitting the heavy lift, and then you don’t make that lift, it’s horrible! It feels like weeks wasted!
In my younger days I would get all keyed up, listening to Pantera and Slayer for every workout. I can’t handle all that nervous energy now.
Edit:
It’s interesting to hear from Sheiko and Mike T. Russian athletes appear to be so relaxed and calm, like they are cold blooded. No need to get excited, few big lifts. Tuchscherer is some kind of mutant, so heavy lifts are no issue, so more heavy lifts.
“Heavy” is only relevant in relative terms here, as in % of 1rm. A 500 bench is certainly heavy but there are some guys who could do that for 10 reps. Anyway, I hear what you are saying but the main issue is still being experienced with handling near-maximal loads. I remember when I decided to really get into PL, I was doing 5/3/1 before and I switched to Mike T’s “generalized intermediate” program. I was used to doing rep maxes and would occasionally work up to a heavy single, but now I was getting stronger and the program called for doubles and triples with weights I had never handled. There were a few nights that I barely slept, thinking about what I had to squat in the morning. I got over that eventually, part of it was due to experimenting with the Bulgarian method (which I don’t recommend, for a number of reasons). Basically, you have to gain confidence in your abilities but also not push beyond what you know you are capable of, ie. no 30lb PR attempts or anything like that. Also, learn to turn fear into aggression and direct it into the bar. I get nervous before big lifts, but I don’t let myself get scared. Visualization techniques can also help with that.
About get psyched up or not, it’s mostly an individual thing. Ed Coan never look too excited, some other guys get a bit crazy. The main thing is CONTROLLED aggression, not a blind rage.
What do you want to hear, a couple sets of rows and tricep extensions? You might as well ask how long he rests between sets, or what he drinks during training.
Accessory exercises include this periodization. I have them written in Excel (I have detailed written only 14 weeks - detailed writing is killing my time). I will gradually publish everything from Monday in my training log. Don’t be scared.
Squat and deadlift are not in this periodization. This is logical when you carefully read the title of the topic.
Tuchscherer would not listen much. His RPE method is based on subjective evalution, which is wrong in principle. Unfortunately, it’s likely to be adversely affected by the person’s ego. His methods will best work only for him.
I don’t mean to be disrespectful, or argumentative, or to derail your thread. But in the name of fun; the method was developed for “unequiped” sports.
It’s true that it doesn’t work for everyone and takes a while to get used to, but if you base your working weights on RPE you will only really be concerned with sets @8-9 RPE, which is one or two reps from failure. If you can’t judge that accurately then you will fail reps and quickly realize the error of your ways. I don’t base my training on RPE, but it’s an effective method for some people. There are problems with writing a whole training cycle based on percentages as well, you can’t predict the rate of progress and if the weights become too light then you will no longer get a substantial training effect.
