Stupid Questions Thread

[Hardartery]

These days though I'm more of a fan of top set+back offs on most stuff versus sets across and at the moment I'm starting to think I really dig moving on of the back offs in front of the top set... but time will tell there...

So like set at 135 225 315 315 315 315 then one heavier set heurisitcally judged after this? I've played around with this and think it's v good if you the type of person to turn your top set into an ultragrind and then have to back way way off or stop.

More like if the plan is to have a top set of 315, with 4 back offs of 275, I'll do:

275x5, 315x5, 275x5x3

Maybe it's just because I've never trained like this before but it seems to help prime myself better for the 'heavy' set and then trick myself into thinking I'm somehow doing less work while maintaining the volume...

It’s a function of getting older and needing more work to get the blood flowing on the way up. Every now and then someone in their 20s or 30s feels the need to let me know that I’m blowing my load with too much volume on the work up. First of all, that volume is not just a means, but also an end in itself; I’m nearly as interested in adding reps here and there and building the base as I am in the top set. Second of all, it’s not a choice - contrary to their thinking, in the absence of the greater volume I’m weaker up top. Doing a few triples or whatever on the way up to “conserve [my] energy” sounds great but at 44 doesn’t work in practice. It just leaves me ice cold.

I was never big on warmups or a lot of workups. I'm still not at almost 51. I typically work up in plates toward the top set, just like I have always done, and don't fool with less than a wheel until the top. I find that, like @mouse , the first few have no bearing on how the rest go. I have felt total trash on workups and then blow out the heavier sets like they were less weight than the first few. I have also knocked felt like trash all the way through all of the sets, the first couple are no predictor of anything for me. I do find that these days some activation stuff can help - like doing some airplanes before squats or deads for example. I also find that some things refuse to activate at low weight so it doesn't do me any good to knock out a lot of light warmup stuff it just uses up the gas tank.

[OverheadDeadlifts]

More like if the plan is to have a top set of 315, with 4 back offs of 275, I'll do:

275x5, 315x5, 275x5x3

Maybe it's just because I've never trained like this before but it seems to help prime myself better for the 'heavy' set and then trick myself into thinking I'm somehow doing less work while maintaining the volume...

I also like doing this from a time saving standpoint. If you’re doing 315 for a top set with 275 back offs, you’re probably gonna hit 275 or thereabouts on your warm ups anyway. May as well turn it into a set.

———————————-

Anybody done adductor isolation work and found it helped their squats/pulls? Finally rigged up a pulley system* and been playing around with lower body isolations and holy shit doing standing adductor work feels amazing. Nuckols says the adductors might be doing most of the hip extension out of the bottom of a squat so training them directly seems like a good idea.

*the pulley system is a seatbelt slung over my rack crossmember with a backpack attached to put weights into. It moves surprisingly smoothly.

[DCR]

@Hardartery, I recall you saying as much previously. I wish that I could proceed as such, but when I try I can feel every joint creaking. That said, you’re much stronger than me, and so perhaps your 135 is my empty bar, and percentage wise our increments actually may be similar. I probably do a lot more reps, but I perhaps could cut that down with some more targeted mind muscle connection and the like. I just need some sort of pump before I get heavy, or nothing good happens.

[mouse]

More like if the plan is to have a top set of 315, with 4 back offs of 275, I'll do:

275x5, 315x5, 275x5x3

Maybe it's just because I've never trained like this before but it seems to help prime myself better for the 'heavy' set and then trick myself into thinking I'm somehow doing less work while maintaining the volume...

I also like doing this from a time saving standpoint. If you’re doing 315 for a top set with 275 back offs, you’re probably gonna hit 275 or thereabouts on your warm ups anyway. May as well turn it into a set.

This is an added benefit and a large reason for why I started trying it out...

[Hardartery]

Hardartery, I recall you saying as much previously. I wish that I could proceed as such, but when I try I can feel every joint creaking. That said, you’re much stronger than me, and so perhaps your 135 is my empty bar, and percentage wise our increments actually may be similar. I probably do a lot more reps, but I perhaps could cut that down with some more targeted mind muscle connection and the like. I just need some sort of pump before I get heavy, or nothing good happens.

Everyone is different, some guys need the reps to flush the muscles with blood. I would bet that it is related to fibre type at least a little. I think that my background of doing heavy physical labour from a young age plays into it as well. For me, the early sets might be nothing like the work sets as far as form. I might pause a lighter set, or move around with it in different positions, plenty of things that PL coaches would freak out about because I am literally just playing with it and getting a feel. I might hold a DL at the top a little and screw around with my shoulders or shift the hips a little just trying to wake everything up and feel it. I have a weight where I get serious, but coming from the Strongman background I have always fought to NOT have a specific plane or groove, I needed to be able to do things out of the groove without worrying about it.

Edit to add:
I appreciate being referred to as strong in any context. The truth is that I am coming to terms with becoming a weak old man and the impending further decline in ability that is surely coming. That said, I am paying a lot of attention to things like other people's warmups to see what might benefit me. Some of it may in fact have benefited me earlier but youth and a hard head overcome bad technique or bad training at times.

[MarkKO]

These days though I'm more of a fan of top set+back offs on most stuff versus sets across and at the moment I'm starting to think I really dig moving on of the back offs in front of the top set... but time will tell there...

So like set at 135 225 315 315 315 315 then one heavier set heurisitcally judged after this? I've played around with this and think it's v good if you the type of person to turn your top set into an ultragrind and then have to back way way off or stop.

More like if the plan is to have a top set of 315, with 4 back offs of 275, I'll do:

275x5, 315x5, 275x5x3

Maybe it's just because I've never trained like this before but it seems to help prime myself better for the 'heavy' set and then trick myself into thinking I'm somehow doing less work while maintaining the volume...

It’s a function of getting older and needing more work to get the blood flowing on the way up. Every now and then someone in their 20s or 30s feels the need to let me know that I’m blowing my load with too much volume on the work up. First of all, that volume is not just a means, but also an end in itself; I’m nearly as interested in adding reps here and there and building the base as I am in the top set. Second of all, it’s not a choice - contrary to their thinking, in the absence of the greater volume I’m weaker up top. Doing a few triples or whatever on the way up to “conserve [my] energy” sounds great but at 44 doesn’t work in practice. It just leaves me ice cold.

I was never big on warmups or a lot of workups. I'm still not at almost 51. I typically work up in plates toward the top set, just like I have always done, and don't fool with less than a wheel until the top. I find that, like @mouse , the first few have no bearing on how the rest go. I have felt total trash on workups and then blow out the heavier sets like they were less weight than the first few. I have also knocked felt like trash all the way through all of the sets, the first couple are no predictor of anything for me. I do find that these days some activation stuff can help - like doing some airplanes before squats or deads for example. I also find that some things refuse to activate at low weight so it doesn't do me any good to knock out a lot of light warmup stuff it just uses up the gas tank.

Over time I've come to use fewer work up/ warm up sets partly because of time and partly because they just seemed unnecessary.

What I have noticed is that compared to when I was in my early 30s to now (late 30s), there is no extra need for smaller jumps. I just make sure that before I get to the bar I'm ready but that also only takes two to three activation/prehab things at most anyway.

[ChasingCurls69]

Never used RPE but, generalizing my sets of 5 across, usually works out to something like @7, 8, 9, 8.5, 7.5, presuming suitable rests. Gets shittier, and then somehow get the groove and it gets easier.

I have experienced this kind of thing as well... but on the opposite curve.

First set will feel shitty as I get used to the weight, 2nd/3rd(sometimes 4th) will get easier as I adjust/find a groove, and then 4th/5th will get shittier again as I start to tire out.

Thats why when I judge RPE I'm usually aiming for it on only the first and last set, don't go above the target and if you hit it early either adjust or call it.

These days though I'm more of a fan of top set+back offs on most stuff versus sets across and at the moment I'm starting to think I really dig moving on of the back offs in front of the top set... but time will tell there...

I am also big on doing one back-off before the top set. Usually it's a % drop or % of e1rm so I do it based off of my target top set and then adjust the rest if my actual top set is different from the target.

[gymdad150]

These days though I'm more of a fan of top set+back offs on most stuff versus sets across and at the moment I'm starting to think I really dig moving on of the back offs in front of the top set... but time will tell there...

So like set at 135 225 315 315 315 315 then one heavier set heurisitcally judged after this? I've played around with this and think it's v good if you the type of person to turn your top set into an ultragrind and then have to back way way off or stop.

More like if the plan is to have a top set of 315, with 4 back offs of 275, I'll do:

275x5, 315x5, 275x5x3

Maybe it's just because I've never trained like this before but it seems to help prime myself better for the 'heavy' set and then trick myself into thinking I'm somehow doing less work while maintaining the volume...

It’s a function of getting older and needing more work to get the blood flowing on the way up. Every now and then someone in their 20s or 30s feels the need to let me know that I’m blowing my load with too much volume on the work up. First of all, that volume is not just a means, but also an end in itself; I’m nearly as interested in adding reps here and there and building the base as I am in the top set. Second of all, it’s not a choice - contrary to their thinking, in the absence of the greater volume I’m weaker up top. Doing a few triples or whatever on the way up to “conserve [my] energy” sounds great but at 44 doesn’t work in practice. It just leaves me ice cold.

As a "young man" trapped in an old man's body. I find that as much as I want to keep my warm-up sets in line with my top set(s), I've taken to ramping them down into the top set(s), ex.: eb *10, 70kg 5*2, 100kg 3*2, 115kg *2, 120kg *1...and then 125kg 5*3

I'm plenty "warm" by then, and I'm not wasting energy reserves by doing set of 5 all the way up to my working set.

I've also done a 5-10 minute ride on the Airdyne prior to lifting, just to get the whole body primed for the days session.

[dw]

Here's a stupid but sincere question for you -

Hypothetically, if your traps were your limiting muscle in the deadlift, how would failure occur?

[5hout]

Here's a stupid but sincere question for you -

Hypothetically, if your traps were your limiting muscle in the deadlift, how would failure occur?

Curve this for source, but I'd think almost certainly your upper back would round too much and either force a strong lower/mid back to collapse or put you in a position where you fall forward over the bar.

[lehman906]

Here's a stupid but sincere question for you -

Hypothetically, if your traps were your limiting muscle in the deadlift, how would failure occur?

Curve this for source, but I'd think almost certainly your upper back would round too much and either force a strong lower/mid back to collapse or put you in a position where you fall forward over the bar.

That's exactly what happens to me with a heavy farmers walk since my grip is better than my upper back, so I would imagine it would be similar on deadlift, especially if using straps.

[Hardartery]

Here's a stupid but sincere question for you -

Hypothetically, if your traps were your limiting muscle in the deadlift, how would failure occur?

I don't think it's actually possible, your traps aren't particularly important in a DL. Maybe you tweak a trap at the top, which I have done with heavy Farmer's (I was at a training session with Geoff Dolan and Hugo Girard and used all the pro implements and weights for the contest we were all going to be doing, but I was going as an amateur).

[dw]

Here's a stupid but sincere question for you -

Hypothetically, if your traps were your limiting muscle in the deadlift, how would failure occur?

I don't think it's actually possible, your traps aren't particularly important in a DL. Maybe you tweak a trap at the top, which I have done with heavy Farmer's (I was at a training session with Geoff Dolan and Hugo Girard and used all the pro implements and weights for the contest we were all going to be doing, but I was going as an amateur).

On the one hand the bolded part feels true, but on the other it does seem to be a universal truth that getting a big DL gets you big traps.

[ChasingCurls69]

Here's a stupid but sincere question for you -

Hypothetically, if your traps were your limiting muscle in the deadlift, how would failure occur?

You would probably miss above the knee about an inch or two from lockout, similar to if your lower back was too weak to lockout.

[Philbert]

Here's a stupid but sincere question for you -

Hypothetically, if your traps were your limiting muscle in the deadlift, how would failure occur?

Either when you stopped pulling because you felt something about to go, or when your shoulder ripped off your trunk and was dangling by the skin and clavicle, severing your brachial plexus and causing your grip to fail.
Seriously though I think you would fail near the top.

[augeleven]

Do you program push presses any different than strict presses?
Not that I have found the way to program strict press anyway…

[Hanley]

Do you program push presses any different than strict presses?
Not that I have found the way to program strict press anyway…

I do. It's a ballistic movement. Ballistic movements with heavyish loads (like 65+% 1RM on a barbell) tend to be RPE 9-10 (scaled to maximal effort not reps in reserve).

A bunch of singles/doubles makes a lot of sense to me.

[augeleven]

Do you program push presses any different than strict presses?
Not that I have found the way to program strict press anyway…

I do. It's a ballistic movement. Ballistic movements with heavyish loads (like 65+% 1RM on a barbell) tend to be RPE 9-10 (scaled to maximal effort not reps in reserve).

A bunch of singles/doubles makes a lot of sense to me.

Cool. My current approach is to do triples going up in 5 pound jumps until the last slows down some and end one a double or two. I guess I’ll keep going and keep them ballistic. Thanks

[asdf]

Do you program push presses any different than strict presses?

I slot the two exercises differently. Strict presses go on a upper-body day, but push presses tax my legs and knees sufficiently that they go on a lower-body / Olympic lifting day,

[OrderInChaos]

Do you program push presses any different than strict presses?
Not that I have found the way to program strict press anyway…

I do. It's a ballistic movement. Ballistic movements with heavyish loads (like 65+% 1RM on a barbell) tend to be RPE 9-10 (scaled to maximal effort not reps in reserve).

A bunch of singles/doubles makes a lot of sense to me.

What does this look like for throwing, when the ballistic movement is very submaximal? (Discus/javelin/shotput/etc.). I've seen recommendations such as "6 triples, maximum volitional effort w/30-60s rest between each triple. Rest 5min. 6 singles, 30-60s rest each (and possibly heavier implement)", but that's just internet garbage.

Do you want complete rest between efforts that don't last long enough to go lactic/anaerobic, and without observing a significant decrease in performance between sets?

{Trying to tease out a logical way of training for keg throw using more T&F/thrower principles and less Strongman - only because I can grit up and do work capacity no problem, but suck major ass at generating either height or distance with throws.}

And for the really stupid question: for a motor moron fatigue resistant non-athlete, have you ever seen much progress on stuff like hammer throw, shotput, etc as they get stronger, after having learned well the mechanics of the sport (i.e. not the improved distance from learning how to actually yeet the damn implement, but legitimate force production improvements over time from training)?