Weak chest (48yo male)

andyrusho · September 2019

Thanks for all the advice . This morning I started the 5x5 program and I feel a lot better .
I’m excited to conquer this!!
🏋🏻‍♂️

ZakariyaRyu · September 2019

erickirb wrote: »

Why not try switching to a strength based program too then?

Hypertrophy programs will also go much better for you after you have already build up a steady base of strength. I suggest getting strength in first, then switch to hypertrophy as an intermediate program

My hypertrophy program allows for growth on all but accessory lifts weekly. Is that really necessary?

erickirb · September 2019

ZakariyaRyu wrote: »

erickirb wrote: »

Why not try switching to a strength based program too then?

Hypertrophy programs will also go much better for you after you have already build up a steady base of strength. I suggest getting strength in first, then switch to hypertrophy as an intermediate program

My hypertrophy program allows for growth on all but accessory lifts weekly. Is that really necessary?

Is your goal to get stronger or bigger? which one takes more precedence?

ljmorgi · September 2019

dodea48 wrote: »

John Winger could barely do five push ups and after one day in the Army he could do 20 for Sgt. Hulka

Chieflrg · September 2019

wiigelec wrote: »

Chieflrg wrote: »

You do realize that that organization responsible for that book lost nearly all their top coaches because of unfounded blanket context that is in that book that isn't backed by established evidence?

I'm not trying to down Rip for he does some good work especially for advanced age people, but that book has many holes for long term success and I certainly wouldn't treat the context as law.

Are you talking about the barbell medicine crew? That whole deal was about rpe and intermediate programming primarily the Texas method. Of course they are coming out with their new rpe based version of a novice program but the principals appear to be similar ie full body moderate volume moderate intensity.

As far as established evidence people have been getting strong for a long time using squat bench press and deadlift.

Have you read the book? It is mostly technical and mechanical explanations of form on the main lifts how and why to perform them in a specific manner.

It has many holes for long term success because the 3x5 increase intensity every session is a beginner program only intended to be run for a few months. It’s not intended for long term success. My personal favorite for long term success is some iteration of hlm.

Actually according to Jordan stated one big reasons was the online coaching extension of Starting Strength(SSOC) was competing with Barbell Medicine. Jordan was getting hammered about it while other coaches were using his or simular programming without the getting flack for it as he was.

While Austin has said many times he and Jordan would try to discuss the discrepancies from the book that was ignoring current evidence. Rip and possibly others(I don't remember exactly who else) would shut down any talk of why it could be wrong. These things were suppose to be open to discuss and Austin said that if it weren't for that, he would never of left.

Rip had no problems with Jordan's dislike of Texas Method or 5/3/1 as he ok'd and published Jordan's article explaining why those two particular programs are inferior to the majority of lifters. Rip even caught flack from Wendler himself for agreeing with Jordan and publishing the article.

I'm a huge supporter of the squat, dead, and press. I perform all of them frequently in powerlifting training and competitions as well as utilize them for the majority of my trainees templates I program.

That is not the issue. There are many misleading statements in the Starting Strength book as well as other books associated with SS. It would take forever to state them all here. The book has some really excellent content, it also has some content that is not optimal or misleading.

My point is anyone telling someone the first course of action needed is to gain 50lbs because their bench is lackluster.
Especially while there frequency is currently only once a week. This is not only incorrect, but potentially harmful. I'd hazard Rip would agree.

Yes, I've read the SS book several times in the past decade. Like I said it has some really good content, but if we choose to believe certain excerpts out of context of what we are applying the content to, we probably would be better off rereading the book to get a better understanding. We should also question content from books or individuals if we are to continue to learn.