I understand what you are saying. What I’m looking for is a more defined way to work on progressive overload within the parameters and principles.
So far, that has been unanswered.
Also, I have followed Jim’s work from the original 5/3/1, and read all of his books.
The original idea of TM was very clear, 90% and work up from that, as long as possible.
With the new methods we are left with more guesswork, and feel, which renders the original concept rather different/useless. Unless there are certain guidelines to it.
7th test week would be one way, if it allowed us to recalculate the proceeding leaders TM. Earlier example of proceeding with 235 minus 80-90%, this would be relatively autoadjustable.
Another way would be, getting 3-5+ with TM or 95%= would allow for a set ammount of 5-10lbs of increasement ontop of the starting point+the cycles increments. And work a new TM for next leader from that.
Otherwise it is simply guesswork. And I don’t think it’s supposed to be.