I’ve read the articles here about the Waterbury Method and couldn’t find this piece of info.
I want to use it on a single lift, the progression model is fairly simple: starts at 10x3@80%, increasing 2.5-3% every session.
Point is, I want to fit it in my current program, that is divided into a volume phase and an intensity phase, with volume being progressively cut while I approach the intensity phase.
This is where it gets unclear: Waterbury doesn’t seem to offer this kind of option in his progression, he actually speaks against it referring to 24-36 reps as the ideal rep range to keep, so something that would go from as high as 12x3 to as low to 8x3, doesn’t give much room to move from a block to another.
There are 6 session before I get to the intensity phase, and I’ll start a bit lower than the prescribed 80% (76-77%) to get a feel on the progression.
What of these options sounds more legit if I wanted to taper towards a lower volume and get ready for a higher intensity phase?
- Cut off the volume anyway starting at 10x3 (first session) and scaling one set each session, ending at 5x3;
- Cut off the volume while sticking to Waterbury’s ideal rep range, two ways would be to either start at 12x3 (first and second session), then 10x3 (third and fourth), then 8x3 (fifth and sixth) OR to do 12x3 in the first two sessions and stripping one set each following session, ending at 8x3;
- Screw it and keep the same rep scheme for every session, 8-10x3;
this would be while increasing the usual amount (2.5-3%) at every session regardless of the progression I pick.
That isn’t “the Waterbury method”. You can’t take a single lift out of an entire program and think it will apply to whatever you are doing.
This is a whole program for hypertrophy, it sounds like you are wanting to use that one idea for strength?
I know it’s not the method, that’s why I’m referring exclusively to the progression. According to his articles here, the 24-36 rep range is for both strength and hypertrophy, the pure hypertrophy setup has a lower % and more sets IIRC.
While I know that taking a single lift out of a program is not like doing the exact program, I’m just interested in the progression (and won’t whine about the program itself or blame it in any way if it doesn’t work). I need it for my deadlift and responds to what I’m looking for currently - linear progression, a decent total amount of volume at a submaximal but relatively heavy weight
He has “programs” or other progression schemes for single lifts.
Check out his 797M. Or his Strength Focused mesoncycle. He actually like a lower frequency and volume for pure strength.
I don’t think many people respond well to volume dead lifts like this, maybe you are different though.
1 Like
Took a look at them, they don’t really fit much tho.
Some infos: I’m training deadlifts once every two weeks (which is kind the opposite of Waterbury’s high frequency ideas), the other lifts are trained with 5/3/1 percentages and rep schemes.
On the weeks I don’t deadlift, I do a second (light, technical) session of squats, then follow up with RDLs and higher volume back stuff (rows, rear raises, face pulls, pulldowns).
The program has 3 weeks mesocycles and I just finished the first one (the weeks had deadlift - no deadlift - deadlift), so far training deads every 2 weeks seemed to work ok with 5/3/1 rep scheme - on the first (light) week I got 17 reps (vs the 14 of the previous program at the same weight) and in the last (heavy) week I got 12 reps (vs the 10 of the previous program that were at a slightly lower weight).
Oddly enough, what got my deadlift moving was to push the PR set towards higher reps, then follow up with 1-2 triples at a 5-10% increase.
The issue is that 5/3/1 light - medium - heavy week setup is a bit weird when doing a lift every other week, in the mesocycle I’ve just finished I bounced from the first, light week to the last, heavy week, without the medium one in the middle. Pushing for a rep PR has also grinded me a bit.
So I figured it would make more sense to use some kind of linear progression, and the 10x3 sticked out: it packs some good amount of total volume (which, so far, has kept my deadlift moving), at a fairly submaximal percentage (so far, submaximal work has kept my deadlift moving too).
It has the added plus that sets of 3 would let me practice the hook grip, and seemed easy to scale the progression by reducing the sets while I approached the intensity phase.
Give it a shot. Let me know how it goes later.
There’s no such thing as a zero when it comes to hard training, so worst case scenario is you push yourself and get better.
It sounds like you really WANT to do it, which by itself can make it work better than something you don’t want to do.
1 Like
Will do!
Guess I’ll go with the reduced volume option on paper, and see how the first few sessions go, if I see I can work up to more sets I’ll adjust from session to session.
Would look like this:
Mesocycle 2 - volume
week one - deadlift off (<<< this is where I am)
week two - deadlift 10x3@77-78%
week three - deadlift off
Mesocycle 3 - volume
week one - deadlift 9x3 +2.5-3%
week two - deadlift off
week three - deadlift 8x3 +2.5-3%
Mesocycle 4 - transition
week one - deadlift 7x3 +2.5-3%
week two - deadlift 6x3 +2.5-3%
week three - deadlift 5x3 +2.5-3%
Mesocycle 5 - intensity
Will work up to a realistic triple, double or single each week, with the setup above I should begin at 10x3@140kg and end at 5x3@160kg, which sounds pretty doable. I’ll probably make it simple and over the course of three weeks simply use 5% increments on 160kg - first week shoot for 168x3, second week 176kg x2, third week 184kg x1, or something like that.