Author Topic: chasing athleticism (Read 939723 times)

entropy · « **Reply #1920 on:** June 21, 2014, 06:45:35 am »

^This, im talking about a training max. The whole idea of a 'true max' is kind of a misnomer, like in statistics when frequentists talk about a 'true proportion' as if such a thing actually exists. A 'true max' which is contingent on months of leadup and hinges on being perfectly prepared to realise it only once and never again isn't useful for training purposes. You dont even know what your true max is, maybe you were good for 10g more, or maybe you went too heavy by 100g, who really knows, it's not important for the purpose of training which is something you do all the time not just a once off event. What we are interested in as athletes is being able to perform at a decent high level regularly.

vag · « **Reply #1921 on:** June 21, 2014, 07:33:02 am »

Quote from: entropy on June 21, 2014, 06:45:35 am

You dont even know what your true max is, maybe you were good for 10g more, or maybe you went too heavy by 100g, who really knows, it's not important for the purpose of training which is something you do all the time not just a once off event. What we are interested in as athletes is being able to perform at a decent high level regularly.

And that is exactly why you don't have to chase your true max every day, but a safe 90-95% is a wise choice. Anything over 85% is supposed to recruit all muscle units anyway.
Many ( if not most ) people in here train like that, going for a daily heavy -but not max- single, them back-off and do some rep work. kingfish, raptor, mutumbo, dreyth, ChrisM and so on. I did it too in my recent periodization routine ( in the strength phase, this was done to build strength, not preserve it ), here is kellyb's guidelines:

Quote

Squat: 8 x 1 @ 90% (add weight the 1st 4-5 sets working up to heavy but solid form single. Reduce the weight by 10% and perform 3-4 more sets of 1)

If you love the PR, the true max, which you do, it is ok, go for it, just do it less often, like once a week or every 2 weeks. I bet that following the buffered approach will lead to better PRs when you go for them like that.

Just 2c again.

Raptor · « **Reply #1922 on:** June 21, 2014, 12:47:50 pm »

This ^^^

And the better you get, the less you should aim for a true max, and the more recovery you will need after a true max.

entropy · « **Reply #1923 on:** June 21, 2014, 02:20:47 pm »

Quote from: vag on June 21, 2014, 07:33:02 am

Quote from: entropy on June 21, 2014, 06:45:35 am
You dont even know what your true max is, maybe you were good for 10g more, or maybe you went too heavy by 100g, who really knows, it's not important for the purpose of training which is something you do all the time not just a once off event. What we are interested in as athletes is being able to perform at a decent high level regularly.

And that is exactly why you don't have to chase your true max every day, but a safe 90-95% is a wise choice. Anything over 85% is supposed to recruit all muscle units anyway.
Many ( if not most ) people in here train like that, going for a daily heavy -but not max- single, them back-off and do some rep work. kingfish, raptor, mutumbo, dreyth, ChrisM and so on. I did it too in my recent periodization routine ( in the strength phase, this was done to build strength, not preserve it ), here is kellyb's guidelines:
Quote
Squat: 8 x 1 @ 90% (add weight the 1st 4-5 sets working up to heavy but solid form single. Reduce the weight by 10% and perform 3-4 more sets of 1)

If you love the PR, the true max, which you do, it is ok, go for it, just do it less often, like once a week or every 2 weeks. I bet that following the buffered approach will lead to better PRs when you go for them like that.

Just 2c again.

Quote from: Raptor on June 21, 2014, 12:47:50 pm

This ^^^

And the better you get, the less you should aim for a true max, and the more recovery you will need after a true max.

You guys are all hung up on this concept of a true max and a percentage of it. There is no true max and taking percentages of something that doesn't exist is a mistake upon that. Forget the 90-95% of a "true max" - that's even more meaningless. Do you seriously believe that stuff?

vag · « **Reply #1924 on:** June 21, 2014, 02:25:26 pm »

True maxes are nonsensical they have nothing to do with this bullshit.

Raptor · « **Reply #1925 on:** June 21, 2014, 02:34:09 pm »

The true max is your PR.

ChrisM · « **Reply #1926 on:** June 21, 2014, 02:38:31 pm »

Can someone define true max?

Is it truthfully the max you'll ever lift? Because I'd hope to be training at 50% of it currently then.

Is it the true max for your current strength levels? Then its not really a true max IMO.

Maybe its a true max for that day? Which would make it your daily max right?

Idk about everyone here but when I go lift I just try to see how my body reacts that day. Some days are stronger than others and I adjust accordingly. As long as I progress in the long term then I know I'm heading in the correct direction. Too much thinking. Moar lifting. Lol

entropy · « **Reply #1927 on:** June 21, 2014, 02:39:04 pm »

Idiots. Avishek has a point even if he's being paraphrased and caricatured. Raptor before you start typing, even your saviour lord gomad would say the concept is meaningless for a novice, which pretty much goes for everyone here even King and Chris since they're weak right now. Lord gomad would say for a novice the 1rm is subject to frequent change so much so that it might well be ignored. When you are looking at really advanced guys who are programming their lifts to make say 2.5kg PRs over a period of 12 months, then maybe you can pinpoint a number as a 'true max' which is nothing more than a restatement for saying PRs are really hard to come by, so for all reasonable purposes the max can be considered a constant. Even so, it doesn't need to apply to day to day training.

ChrisM · « **Reply #1928 on:** June 21, 2014, 02:40:48 pm »

Ninja post Raptor! Lol!

If your true max is a PR then it changes. Thats not a very 'true' statement in my mind. I think worrying about a true max is just a waste of time.

Raptor · « **Reply #1929 on:** June 21, 2014, 02:43:49 pm »

What you should care about is your failed lifts. They are above the "daily max" and they eat your CNS.

Doing lifts just because you squatted 180 kg 2 months ago and therefore that's the weight you should be squatting any time you want is just wrong.

That's why daily maxes are established (where the daily max is just a heavy single, not a 10 second grinder) and that's why you lower the weight after you are establishing that daily max.

But whatever man, do whatever you want to do.

Raptor · « **Reply #1930 on:** June 21, 2014, 02:47:13 pm »

Let me rephrase:

1) A daily max is a "max" lift that is done in a calm psychological state (no yelling, pumping up, coffee and roid-rage). Just a calm, solid single.

2) A true max is done in the mode that is listed in between the parentheses.

If a lift is failed in a calm psychological state, then it's above the daily max and it eats the CNS like I eat Nutella when on a bulk.

seifullaah73 · « **Reply #1931 on:** June 21, 2014, 02:49:55 pm »

I think what entropy is referring to as there being no such thing as true max, as in the true limit of the body's capability of lifting a certain weight, so in this case that is true there is no true max, as the more you train, more protein you take the more you can increase your true max strength, which is the same as RM, just my 2c

entropy · « **Reply #1932 on:** June 21, 2014, 03:21:12 pm »

Exactly ^!

Lol so suppose i listen to this awesome textbook advice and say ok my true max is 140kg (lol) and then i dutifully calculate 80% of that which is 112.5kg, so i take off 20+kg off the bar straight away to be a good and educated trainee. I spend the next 6-8 weeks doing a lot of reps with 112.5kg, would i become stronger or weaker? I'll tell you for a fact i'd become weaker. So there is something missing here in all of this chatter of true maxes and percentages, and that's stronger and weaker, that's all there is to it. Either you're getting stronger or you're not. And i'm not hence all this angst

It's part of the conventional advice to do volume for sets of 5-8 with 80-85%. I'm not opposed but at this point i could just use RSR and say fuck that, i'm going to make 120kg my training weight and build up from 6x2x120 up to 6x6x120 over 3 weeks and last time i did that RSR1 that took me up to a 155kg squat while maxing 2-3x a week. The following time i did RSR with 130kg, 6x2x130 up to 4x6x130 which got me up to 145/160/170kg which also included regular maxing. But this time without RSR, i'm stuck at 140kg, which i believe now is because my FS is too high that it's affecting the subsequent BS but i haven't checked that by changing my FS. Idk.

Raptor · « **Reply #1933 on:** June 21, 2014, 05:06:24 pm »

Wow... there are so many things wrong there that...

Well, good luck.

seifullaah73 · « **Reply #1934 on:** June 21, 2014, 06:42:58 pm »

Quote from: entropylink=topic=4850.msg100682#msg100682 date=1403378472

Exactly ^!

Lol so suppose i listen to this awesome textbook advice and say ok my true max is 140kg (lol) and then i dutifully calculate 80% of that which is 112.5kg, so i take off 20+kg off the bar straight away to be a good and educated trainee. I spend the next 6-8 weeks doing a lot of reps with 112.5kg, would i become stronger or weaker? I'll tell you for a fact i'd become weaker.

How does that work? You would get stronger of course unless you lack in something, nutrition, recovery, mechanics, as well as other things, which would have to be addressed.

Adarq.org

News:

Author Topic: chasing athleticism (Read 939723 times)

entropy

Re: chasing athleticism

vag

Re: chasing athleticism

Raptor

Re: chasing athleticism

entropy

Re: chasing athleticism

vag

Re: chasing athleticism

Raptor

Re: chasing athleticism

ChrisM

Re: chasing athleticism

entropy

Re: chasing athleticism

ChrisM

Re: chasing athleticism

Raptor

Re: chasing athleticism

Raptor

Re: chasing athleticism

seifullaah73

Re: chasing athleticism

entropy

Re: chasing athleticism

Raptor

Re: chasing athleticism

seifullaah73

Re: chasing athleticism