FSP+FBE workout

A1|        - planche training: tuck holds + progressions

B1|        - PPPups
             - flat tuck FL Rows

A2 |       - back lever training: tuck holds + inverted hang to BL+ reversals

B2|        - Inverted Pull (pull variations) What can i place here?
             - Bulgarian ring dips

A3|        - Front Lever: tuck holds + extended leg holds

B3|        - SLS + other Leg/jumping exercises

A4|        - Hollow Position x 60secs          
             - Handstand work

B4|        - HeSPU/HSPU (or OACs) |(OR)| Ring Muscle Up Progression with bands/tubes

static hold >15secs → next progression level

I will set the reps like killroy did, max hold divided by 2 etc.. but how should I set the reps on the FBE (bodywheight exercises)?

Thanks !

 

Reps should be in the 3-8 range and fairly close to your max. If you can't do 3, or you can do much more than 8, then you should be doing an easier or harder exercise.

For inverted pull work you can do ring row variations. 

Also, look into the Foundation series. At your level of strength and experience, you could get a whole lot out of it 

Thanks for the information didn't noticed there was a second eBook. There is one problem, I don't have the opportunity to do rope climbs and I can't think of anything which could come close, is there an "alternative"?

Hari_Seldon said:

Reps should be in the 3-8 range and fairly close to your max. If you can't do 3, or you can do much more than 8, then you should be doing an easier or harder exercise.

 

Not true at all. There are a few ways to train a movement with sets of only 1-2 reps and build the capacity to doing 5+ reps per set. Sometimes there is no suitable progression to bridge the gap to doing 3+ reps per set of the next movement.

As for the posted routine, I will give my opinion on some things:

1. Drop the OAC work for now and focus on the muscle up. It's a basic prerequisite before even training the OAC. Also don't do the inverted pull up yet either.

2. For bent arm training, use the adv tuck FL rows. You may want to do them 2 times per week. 

3. Use supersets and pair antagonistic movements (FL rows and pushups, for example).

4. Insert freestanding handstands in your warmup for 10-20 minutes(including rest). Insert endurance work at the end 1-2 times per week.

5. Your isometric holds should be 5-30s in your work sets. Shorter than that doesn't allow enough time under tension for supercompensation and progression. Longer than that doesn't contribute significantly to strength, but it can be useful in some cases. I would suggest 1-6 reps per set for the FBEs. More sets when using lower reps (or hold times) and fewer sets when using higher reps (or hold times). 

Here is an example:

Monday:

FL paired with Planche

Muscle Up paired with Hollow Hold

Tuesday:

Back Lever

FL Row paired with PPP or Dips

Legs

Thursday:

FL paired with Planche

Muscle Up paired with Hollow Hold

Friday:

Back Lever

FL Row paired with PPP or Dips 

Legs

raja said:

Not true at all. There are a few ways to train a movement with sets of only 1-2 reps and build the capacity to doing 5+ reps per set. Sometimes there is no suitable progression to bridge the gap to doing 3+ reps per set of the next movement.

 

The exercises for which this is necessary are so few and so advanced that the OP does not have to worry about them. Sticking to 3-8 reps/movement is the simplest way to do things.

I would like to add that coach has pretty much bridged these gaps with the foundation series progressions.

Also, Raja: What makes you say a muscle up is a progression for OAC?  I dont think there is any reason that a muscle up must be done before a OAC.  It is easier yes, but also different.

Hari_Seldon said:

The exercises for which this is necessary are so few and so advanced that the OP does not have to worry about them. Sticking to 3-8 reps/movement is the simplest way to do things.

Not always. Of course there is variation between individuals due to various factors, but to say this is unnecessary is inaccurate. I've experienced this with a few movements, and accumulating volume with singles and doubles established a solid base for further strength gains. Remember, strength is a skill, and you should practice with the skill as much as you can (if you want to get good at it).

Daniel Burnham said:

I would like to add that coach has pretty much bridged these gaps with the foundation series progressions.

 

Also, Raja: What makes you say a muscle up is a progression for OAC?  I dont think there is any reason that a muscle up must be done before a OAC.  It is easier yes, but also different.

The gaps are not completely bridged as Hari is suggesting, which is why the foundation series uses single and double reps in the programming.

The muscle up is a basic skill for further gymnastic strength development. How else do you get on the rings to train everything else? If you can't do one, you have no business seriously training toward the OAC. It is like training for a one arm handstand before being able to do a freestanding handstand.

This doesn't mean you can't train maximal bent arm strength, but the focus should be on First Things First.

raja said:

Not always. Of course there is variation between individuals due to various factors, but to say this is unnecessary is inaccurate. I've experienced this with a few movements, and accumulating volume with singles and doubles established a solid base for further strength gains. Remember, strength is a skill, and you should practice with the skill as much as you can (if you want to get good at it).

 

The gaps are not completely bridged as Hari is suggesting, which is why the foundation series uses single and double reps in the programming.

 

 

Could you give specific examples of progressions where you found it necessary to drop down to 1-2 reps? 

Foundation makes use of a periodization template which incorporates 1-2 rep sets in some of the earlier weeks for lower-volume movements. This does not mean is is necessary to do so; it's merely the style of programming that Foundation uses. 

raja said:

The muscle up is a basic skill for further gymnastic strength development. How else do you get on the rings to train everything else? If you can't do one, you have no business seriously training toward the OAC. It is like training for a one arm handstand before being able to do a freestanding handstand.

 

This doesn't mean you can't train maximal bent arm strength, but the focus should be on First Things First.

Daniel is right. A MU and a OAC are completely different. Your analogy of the OAHS to HS does not match this since I don't see how the MU transition and dip is a prerequisite for OAC. A double arm pull-up or chin-up is a prerequisite, but not MUs or dips. You don't need to get above the rings to train a OAC either. You also said that a MU is a basic skill for further GST development, but the OAC is not a gymnastics exercise.

Thanks guys, I have one last problem though. I just got the Foundation One but I am not sure how to use the exercises. The first thing I did was selecting the right stages for me like PE1.. etc and setting up the plan. Is the 12 Week Cycle my FBE training to which I have to add my FSP training to practise the levers?

raja said:

... The muscle up is a basic skill for further gymnastic strength development. How else do you get on the rings to train everything else? If you can't do one, you have no business seriously training toward the OAC ...

 

I disagree; focusing on rope climbing is much more effective for future gymnastics strength development.  Students who take the time to first master rope climbing have very little difficulty in learning MU..

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Coach Sommer said:

I disagree; focusing on rope climbing is much more effective for future gymnastics strength development.  Students who take the time to first master rope climbing have very little difficulty in learning MU..

 

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Definitely, I get approached quite often from people trying to get their muscle up.  Most times they are not prepared to even attempt one much less start dedicated work towards one.  It is much better to be over prepared than under prepared for something.  Im not saying that people should get a OAC first.  But being on the path towards one and then making a side trip to muscle up along the way is better than prematurely going for the muscle up.  I think working on OAC or rope climb should be a major priority from day one.  Just as it is in the foundation series.  

Sadly most people don't listen to me and are convinced that are just not working the transition "skill" correctly.  I usually respond to this rejection by doing about 15 uninterrupted muscle ups.

The OP can do whatever he chooses. I am suggesting a progression that operates on the idea that the OP is not a gymnast, but would like to be able to move well on the gymnastic rings. If he does not want that and simply wants to train gymnastic strength elements in isolation, he does not need to train for the muscle up. The muscle up and the handstand are essential basic skills for anyone training with these modalities. Just like a freestanding handstand is not needed for HSPU strength development, wall HSPUs are not optimal. The progression stops because of a lack of development of a basic skill.

Hari_Seldon said:

Could you give specific examples of progressions where you found it necessary to drop down to 1-2 reps? 

 

Foundation makes use of a periodization template which incorporates 1-2 rep sets in some of the earlier weeks for lower-volume movements. This does not mean is is necessary to do so; it's merely the style of programming that Foundation uses. 

For example, I had great success with building further volume with muscle ups, headstand pushups, and archer chin ups after I accumulated volume with 1-2 rep sets. Like I mentioned before, it depends on many factors, but a blanket statement like you said is incorrect. Yes there are many tools to manipulate, but I see no reason why using 1-2 rep sets would be detrimental provided that form is proper and volume can be maintained.

When someone is able to perform a OAC or HSPU, do you think they will perform more than 1 rep the first time they are successful? It is doubtful at best. Going back to easier progressions may not allow them to perform 3+ reps with the movement, and the logical progression is to perform more volume with single reps.

B1214N said:

Daniel is right. A MU and a OAC are completely different. Your analogy of the OAHS to HS does not match this since I don't see how the MU transition and dip is a prerequisite for OAC. A double arm pull-up or chin-up is a prerequisite, but not MUs or dips. You don't need to get above the rings to train a OAC either. You also said that a MU is a basic skill for further GST development, but the OAC is not a gymnastics exercise.

All of the OP's other goals are gymnastic movements. If he ever wants to incorporate them into a ring routine or train other skills on the rings(iron cross, forward roll, etc.), the muscle up is essential. 

Coach Sommer said:

I disagree; focusing on rope climbing is much more effective for future gymnastics strength development.  Students who take the time to first master rope climbing have very little difficulty in learning MU..

 

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Coach, it depends on the goal, and I will agree to disagree. As you said, for gymastic strength development, rope climbing is better. For skill development, I still believe the muscle up is a higher priority in beginners. After all, the goal is not to be strong, but to be capable movers (which includes strength among other factors)

raja said:

For example, I had great success with building further volume with muscle ups, headstand pushups, and archer chin ups after I accumulated volume with 1-2 rep sets. Like I mentioned before, it depends on many factors, but a blanket statement like you said is incorrect. Yes there are many tools to manipulate, but I see no reason why using 1-2 rep sets would be detrimental provided that form is proper and volume can be maintained.

 

You are confusing the difference between "necessary" and "of potential use". 3-8 reps is a perfectly valid rule of thumb. While working an exercise at 1-2 reps can be useful, it's rarely necessary to progress. It's certainly not necessary for exercises as basic as a muscle up or HeSPU. 

raja said:

... Coach, it depends on the goal, and I will agree to disagree. As you said, for gymastic strength development, rope climbing is better. For skill development, I still believe the muscle up is a higher priority in beginners. After all, the goal is not to be strong, but to be capable movers (which includes strength among other factors) ...

- We will agree to disagree then.  However I would be remiss if I didn't point out that my methodology has been proven to produce exceptionally strong athletes.  Where is the similar proof for your recommendation?

- And for the record, MU is not a skill but a strength element.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Daniel Burnham said:

 

Sadly most people don't listen to me and are convinced that are just not working the transition "skill" correctly.  I usually respond to this rejection by doing about 15 uninterrupted muscle ups.

Do you do any work beyond the RC progressions in the Foundation Course to get those muscle ups? Or were they just an added bonus? 

I worked muscle ups before the foundation course were available.  I can tell you that I worked on vertical pulling strength way more than muscle ups and the extra reps just kinda came over time from all the other strength work.  

Muscle ups may not come directly from working rope work and will probably require some training through the transition. But I can definitely say that if you have done the correct prep work (RC) you will be able to go through more ring strength in a reasonable amount of time instead of spending months just trying to get a good muscle up.  

I cant tell you how beneficial rope climbs have been for rings.

Daniel Burnham said:

... I cant tell you how beneficial rope climbs have been for rings ...

There is a reason that rope climbs are a staple for every top gymnast and every top gymnastics team in the world.  They not only work; they are indispensible.  

Whether or not you choose to take advantage of this fact and apply it to your own training is up to you.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

p.s.  Understand also that most of you will need to engage in additional physical prep in order to gain the most benefits from RC work.

Coach Sommer said:

p.s. Understand also that most of you will need to engage in additional physical prep in order to gain the most benefits from RC work.

Will this additional physical prep be covered in the upcoming foundation series?

Thanks

Of course.  

The intent of the Foundation Courses is to not only lead you through the preparatory elements for the seven fundamental GST elements (front lever, straddle planche, side lever, manna, hollow back press, rope climb); but by the end of Foundation Four to have led you to mastery of the seven fundamental GST elements themselves.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Coach Sommer said:

Of course.  

 

The intent of the Foundation Courses is to not only lead you through the preparatory elements for the seven fundamental GST elements (front lever, straddle planche, side lever, manna, hollow back press, rope climb); but by the end of Foundation Four to have led you to mastery of the seven fundamental GST elements themselves.

 

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Coach, now I understand what I was potentially doing to my body when I learned muscle ups before the prep work...and why they were so challenging. will muscle ups be an intermediate GST athlete exercise, along with XR Ring Handstands and other ring elements to be used as Prep work for Iron Cross work which will be covered in the following installment of GB courses?