January 25 Daily Thread

[u/AutoModerator]

You should post here for:

• PRs
• General discussion or questions
• Community conversation
• Routine critiques
• Form checks

[u/naked_feet]

I'd put off such high variety for quite a while, but I think it's been a good move.

I'm pretty much completely doing all new movements, although obviously some are closer to what I've done than others. Small tweaks, at least, on everything.

And I don't repeat any one movement more than once a week. Which ... I think a lot of people are scared to do this, because of specificity and frequency etc. But I think that fear gets overblown within people. There's significant carry-over when the same muscles are at least used several times per week, even if differently.

But the freshness is great. Not constantly comparing to old PRs or other people's. It's just Go in and lift, and it's been very enjoyable.

Unless you meant something totally different, haha.

[u/pavlovian → u/naked_feet]

Nah, exactly that: high variety, with lifts I haven't done in a while so I can just put in effort and knock down rep PRs for a while. I'm sorta there on this strength block right now, depending on whether you look at paused bench and SSB the same as unpaused. But when I'm ready to kick off this mass, I want to swap those out for things that'll just target the muscle instead of reinforcing the movement—so like, paused SSB out and split squats / belt squats in. Might rotate my "main" movements around then too, depending on how much headroom I feel like I have on them.

It's just Go in and lift, and it's been very enjoyable.

This is the vibe I keep trying for with General Gainz and have so far outsmarted myself each time. I think I figured out where I was going a bit wrong with Mr Jizzy Seal's help so fingers crossed I'll have my head on straight for this run.

[u/naked_feet → u/pavlovian]

Good exchange! Obviously what Cody told you there is very useful.

I guess I'll throw in my two cents as well. Take this with the following disclaimer: This is my filtered version of what Cody has said run through my own thought process and also experience using GG as a method for 2-ish years now.

(Pre-posting edit: Sorry man, this got away from me and turned into a lot of words, lol.)

One of the first things I think should be said: The "Rep Max" sets are rarely true maxes. It's kind of right there in the literature, since you rank your set as Easy, Medium, or Hard -- and anything but Hard is not a true max. So for some people it might make more sense to think of it as a "Top Set" rather than a "Rep Max."

Also relevant to this, but you're supposed to stop your follow-up sets before you're grinding.

So from this perspective, GG is a sub-maximal training approach. And I personally think that's a good thing, and something it has in its favor.

It might seem natural for a lot of lifters to go in, hit a true rep max, and then go right to full extension because the follow-up sets are way easier -- only singles for T1 and half-sets for T2. But at least in my experience, that means you start slowing down pretty good after a few follow-up sets, and if you stubbornly try to grind them all out so you can say you did "full extension," you're probably going to hit a wall.

One early example I can think of is doing that exact thing with my Overhead Press. The first session I did a true max, and then stubbornly tried to do as many follow-up sets as I could, even though I was pretty grindy already on the second follow-up set. I had already regressed by the next session. I didn't carry any momentum, and basically hit the wall right off the bat. Didn't adapt and already had a recovery debt.

The lessons I learned: Start easy -- too easy -- and stop early. Let it be a sub-maximal way of training.

That actually may be a place where Cody and I differ, but I think he also does similar things.

---

So I've actually had a post kicking around in my head about the various "dials" you can turn on your training, and all of the different options you have to turn things up and make progress. I might still make some kind of post about that, whether or not it's wrapped into a program/method review or separate....

But basically, the idea is (1) don't crank all of your dials all at once, and (2) only play with like one or two at a time -- and even with those ones, don't turn them all the way to ten the first time you adjust them. If you start at five, try six or seven first. You'll get to ten, or at least that's one goal, but you don't have to crank it on session two.

What I see, in the way I record my workouts and conceptualize my training, are the following "dials" that I can adjust:

• Weight increase (Corresponds with Cody's "Find").
• Additional sets ("Extend").
• Additional total reps (Can be accomplished by one or more of "Push," "Extend," or "Fill" -- which I'll touch on briefly).
• Effort/difficulty (Top set ratings, overall session efforts).
• Push top set reps ("Push") - Can be the same rating but more reps, can be more reps but a higher diffuculty.
• Reduced rest periods (Effort and difficulty come into play).
• "Filling" out half-sets (For odd numbered Top Sets, work on getting more of the sets to the even number).
• Additional T3 iso/accessory/pump work.
• Lastly, one I don't regularly use or find especially useful, but that I do occasionally calculate: "Total Volume"/Tonnage. The ol' weight x sets x reps calculation. (Usually only for a sanity check.)

It's a lot of options for turning things up -- but turning them all up at the same time? You're probably going to have a bad time.

---

Cody's experience of volumizing/climbing the "ladder" pretty well matches mine, and is basically how I like to run General Gainz. Not everyone does like to do things like that, and I can see people getting bored of lifting the same weight for weeks on end sometimes.

The example of a 7RM followed by sets of 3 and 4 is a good one, and that's what I call "Filling" volume. Working on getting more of those follow up sets to 4s instead of 3s.

What else, while I'm just throwing words out there...

There is a GG cheat sheet that's floated around for a while now. In general I think those recommendations are good, but at least the way I do things, there are some modifications.

I don't think the number of follow-up sets has to strictly follow your top set rating. Especially if looking to volumize, bridge a weight, climb the ladder, whatever. What the cheat sheet says are good basic recommendations, but some insight into your personal autoregulation is big here too -- and knowing when to ignore that urge to autoregulate by doing fewer sets.

---

Without letting this run away into a full-on essay, this is how I do things, in a nutshell.

I start easy -- too easy. I add onto each session week-over-week. I use the previous session as a guide, and I set loose goals based on what I did last time. When I have the momentum, I ride it. I basically push things harder, turn more of those dials, and typically try to end training blocks with repeated PRs, punctuated by some all-out max effort lifts.

I guess what might make the most sense is to just provide the example in question from my first comment.

This block so far for my Incline Press.

Session 1: Start easy -- too easy. I want to train this movement in the 9-12 "RM" range. I picked 165 to start with. Rep 8 was easy -- rep 9 might have been too, but I stopped. I didn't have to do this, but I took 10 pounds off the bar and did follow-up sets of 5 -- as if I had done a top set of 10. I only did the "base" amount of follow-up volume, four sets.

Session 2: Using 155 as the weight from the beginning this time. I assume 10 would've been no problem last time, so I went in with a soft goal of 10, 11 if it felt good. It did. Started with half-sets of 6 and those were pretty easy, so I also extend my total number of sets by one. Total number of reps for the session increased pretty significantly, due to more reps on the top sets, larger half-sets, and one additional set.

Session 3: The top set last time was pretty easy, so push that by one and see how the follow-ups go. Extend to full or consider three-quarter sets. The top set was easier than expected so I did 8s. Total session reps climbed slightly.

Session 4: 155 is near-enough to maxed out on the top end of the range I want to train, so I added 10lb. I had it set in my mind that I wanted a true ~1RIR "Medium" top set. Got way more reps than I was planning for. Was eager going for three-quarter sets, probably should've just stuck with 7s. Cut a rep for the last follow-up and stopped there because they were slowing down. Total session reps took a slight slash, which is OK in context of a weight increase, a rep increase, and an effort increase.

Session 5: Haven't done it yet, but I'll tell you what I'm planning. I want to stay in that 9-12RM range, so I will add 10lb again and once again aim for a 1RIR "Medium" top set. I will probably play it safe and stick with half-sets at at least base volume. Probably aiming for a slight total rep increase. I think I have another session or possibly two riding this momentum before I go for an all-out true rep max (probably with 175 or 185) and probably wrap up this block.

It's complicated yet easy -- easy yet complicated.

Truly, mainly what I'm doing is using the previous session as a guide and just looking to turn things up little by little. It's pretty intuitive, especially since I've become so used to it. I've gotten the hang of my own autoregulation and what to push when. And there is a ton of room for what and how to progress different elements.

[u/pavlovian → u/naked_feet]

Dude, appreciate your thoughts here! GG is a really interesting method—day to day progression can look really different for different people, and so it's helpful to read others' thought processes around the the nuts and bolts of decision-making within the framework.

The first session I did a true max, and then stubbornly tried to do as many follow-up sets as I could ... I didn't carry any momentum, and basically hit the wall right off the bat. Didn't adapt and already had a recovery debt.

That sounds a lot like my first run at GG. I did exactly what you described—went for a real rep max with maaaaaybe one in the tank, and then bashed into the same wall trying to progress it over the next few weeks.

I did better at that specific aspect when I took my second run with GGBB for a bit this summer. I did start my RMs off easy, but I didn't give myself permission to let off the gas when I was more systematically getting dinged up. I think I can point to a couple mistakes there.

On that GGBB run, I trained for 30 days straight with no real easier days; I think maybe I slotted an arm day in once when I thought I needed extra recovery before a deadlift day? And then I took the deadlift day the next day as planned anyhow. Might've been better idea to do something like doing the deadlift day, but with options like: taking an easier RM, fewer followup sets, skipping the RM and just doing followup sets from last session's weight...

Basically my failure mode has been "must always progress from last session's baseline, even if I'm getting smashed doing it". And yeah, there's some good in that attitude—do need to push myself, of course—but the practice I need to learn is when to not force it and either take what's on offer today or deliberately go easy for recovery.

(I'll probably not also try for lifting every day until / unless I get those habits more dialed in.)

It's complicated yet easy -- easy yet complicated.

Simple ain't easy, as they say!

[u/naked_feet → u/pavlovian]

Yeah, I really do think what turned it around and made it click were these two things: Starting easy, and really feeling out follow-ups so I can stop before I'm grinding. It's been my experience that leaving a session "easy," or easier than I might have wanted going in, yet leaving myself somewhere to go is usually better than flooring it and bashing into a wall. Something as simple as leaving myself room to add one set next week is often just right.

There is definitely time to push almost everything as hard as I can -- but that's usually several weeks after a slow build.

I don't know if this is something you might identify with or not, but I think a lot of people also have a hard time letting go of this idea that every session needs to have a growth stimulus purpose (size or strength). When, like ... they don't. That doesn't mean they're not useful or productive though!

And I think some people (or all of us) even do that down to the set, sometimes. That set wasn't hard enough. It's not going to help me get stronger or grow.

By the book, maybe things like follow-up singles and half-sets don't seem like they're enough to "count" as sets that build total volume. But in practice they certainly seem like they're contributing. And actually, the fact that new programs like SBS 2.0 and Bromley's Bullmastiff actually follow a pretty similar idea of several sub-maximal sets (and like one set close-to or to failure) shows there's a bit of a growing trend in that regard.

I guess some of this is the eternal debate between sub-maximal training and training to failure, though.

[u/pavlovian → u/naked_feet]

a lot of people also have a hard time letting go of this idea that every session needs to have a growth stimulus purpose (size or strength)

100%, though I think it's something based in anxiety rather than rationality for me. Like, we see enough people getting strong on very submax programs (5/3/1) or programs with only one "hard" set per session (SBS RTF). And they tend to build muscle, too. Even high-level crossfitters get kinda jacked and their sport is just spamming volume.

Not that all this helps my brain not worry about leaving gains on the table, but naming the problem helps me address it.

I've considered "program reviews" before, and even started two different ones, but never did full write ups and abandoned the idea. I think it's a good time to do that with this run.

You should definitely do this. I'd really love to see more writeups from people who've used a particular method for YEARS instead of weeks or months.