From my reading of Ian King’s programs and articles it seems that we have one of the all time greats in our midst. However, I get too much enjoyment out of designing my own programs to follow Ian’s prescriptive ones in the mag. I realise this was probably a joint decision between Ian and T-Mag but find myself wanting to understand the principles behind his programs and apply them myself rather than to follow his blindly. If I do find a principle (eg in Heavy Metal like generalised rep guidelines) … lets just say I adhere to them pretty strictly. Is anyone else keen to see Ian King do more “principles” type articles that summarise his workout principles and maybe refer to parts of previous programs. Like a big holy man once said, “giveth a man a program and he will grow for a while, teacheth him how to design a program and he will become as buffed as [insert your name here]” D-R-E.
Dre: I for one am VERY game for that. When I first read “Get Buffed” it was the PRINCIPLES presented my Ian that fascinated me the most and what generated the most excitement and questions. I also like to “tailor” my programs, based on various sources and experience, and like to make sure that what I’m doing follows sound principles. That way, I can more easily alter and manipulate that program based on my goals.
As an example of a “King” principle that I’m still “chewing” on and caused me to look more closely at my overall program: “If you are simply attempting to create muscle breakdown, as you may in hypertrophy training, the NUMBER of exercises may be more important than the number of SETS PER EXERCISE”. THAT’S the kind of thing I would like to see more of from Ian.
DRE, Mufasa,
I ahven’t had any direct (through the forum) contact with you guys, but I’ve read you threads, and ya’ll know your shit. Here’s my feeling on Ian King’s Principles. They are king. Problem is, how can he write an article for T-mag about the very thing his book is based on without sacrificing book sales? Nevertheless, it goes without saying that it would be a great article.
Great idea. We’ll consider it.
That would be a great article! good idea DRE
All of his programs seem relatively low volume. I’d like some guidelines on where we could add sets if we included active/passive recovery. Also, he briefly mentions concurrent training now and then, such as sprints or martial arts in addition to weights, I’d love to see some expansion on that.
Nice idea. I’d like to see somthing similar with Poliquin’s stuff, if that’s still possible. Ian King’s great, but CP’s always worked better for me…
NOTE FROM MOD: ALREADY WRITTEN, CHAR-DAWG. CHECK THE ARCHIVES FOR “THE SIMPLETON’S GUIDE TO THE POLIQUIN PRINCIPLES”, TWO ARTICLES BY TC.
It’s definitely easier to make a program athlete & sport specific when it’s that way. It’s also better for goal-specific strength training, like hypertrophy, power & strength.
Correct me if I’m wrong but a few of his articles(featured on t-mag) had extensive information on how to design a training program. I’m currently reading King’s book and it’s great, better organized that CP’s book. Also King is a kickass presenter at seminars.
nekago: A large portion (if no most) of “Get Buffed” is actually directed at designing a training program based on specific goals. It really follows in an easy-to-read and logical fashion.
FYI, Ian King publishes a book titled “How to Write Strength Training Programs.” It can be found at ‘Kingsports.Net’