Is Foundation One a complete workout

Hi guys,
I have just started Foundation One, having been attracted here by doing some of the exercises in the BtGB book, which are truly all-body-exercises and low-volume. However, the Foundation program is based on high volumes of very simple exercises. My question is, if I follow the Foundation program, can it be considered a complete workout? It seems to me that there are areas especially along the sides of the legs and torso which do not get activated, and I would like to be able to trust that the workout I do is really complete, and catches all the small stabilising core and joint muscles required to train safely.

I also wonder about why the course is offered together with a handstand course. Does that mean that this course is only complete when combined with that course? (if so, then why are they separate?). Or does it mean that this course is complete if I combine it with (wall) handstands? Or do I not have to worry about missing important parts of training without the handstand bit?

Thanks a lot for help and advice!

Hi Michael

Well, it's complete in the sense that the F-series trains the areas necessary to attain the seven end goals of front lever, straddle planche, manna, rope climb, single leg squat, hollow back press and side lever. Everyone's definition of 'complete' varies, and if by by your definition you include a 2.5x bodyweight backsquat or something else, then no, it isn't complete. Some people on the forum have experimented with combining olympic lifting with F1, but I don't know their results. F1-2 is certainly infinitely more 'complete' than any of the amateurish programs I concocted myself in the past. In particular the integrated mobility drills have opened up a whole new dimension, to me at least. Many of them are pretty damn hard.

F1 is initially very simple, but it gets quite hard at the later stages, even more so in F2. Personally, I have dropped all assistance exercises and additional pet exercises, save from a couple of very basic additions, namely the straddle L progression and some grip endurance training for climbing.

Edit:

I would absolutely recommend getting H1. I suppose that it is not strictly required for general fitness, but if you are serious about this, it is gold. There's so much stuff in there, that I had never thought of, much less thought about implementing. Unless you're already a gymnasts it will expand your horizon of knowledge about training a great deal, and keep you occupied for years.

Foundation also covers the majority the exercises in btgb.

Go ahead and look at the seven goal.movements. Put them in a workout. If you find a program that addresses more of the body than that let me know

Ravn - thanks a lot. Good to hear that you feel it sufficient to drop other exercises. I really want a program I can trust to take care of the details, so I will not have to give it too much thinking (I have a challenging job and two kids - so just trying not to grow too fat and weak). Complete for me is defined as a program that gives me that security.
I am curious about H1 now, I will give it a shot if I still do the program in a few months. Am really looking forward to the more complex exercises, though, it is the complexity that attracted me to this training.

Charm - sure, the goal movements are full-body. But the goal movements are at the end of Foundation 4, and according to my calculations, it will take 1½ years just to get to F2. My question was whether following the F1 exercises alone could constitute a full workout.

Foundation is a complete course. It takes care of all the details: mobility, core strength (front, back and sides), push strength, pull strength, straight-arm strength, etc. It is specifically designed to make sure you're able to progress both consistently and safely. 

To address your specific concerns, Foundation 2 contains a lot of oblique work. The leg work is fairly comprehensive, too.

Michael Borregaard said:

Charm - sure, the goal movements are full-body. But the goal movements are at the end of Foundation 4, and according to my calculations, it will take 1½ years just to get to F2. My question was whether following the F1 exercises alone could constitute a full workout.

That whole timeline thing really needs to be addressed in a FAQ. What do your calculations say about Daniel Burnham approaching the end of F4 in two years of correc and consistent work? Josh Slocum going far beyond the strength elements in the Foundation series in five? (IIRC) Dillon starting earlier and doing it in four?

Foundation 1 is the basics from he ground up. How much are you going to benefit from specialised work until you have done the prep work? That's the whole thing about PE before SE.

Charm said:

That whole timeline thing really needs to be addressed in a FAQ. What do your calculations say about Daniel Burnham approaching the end of F4 in two years of correc and consistent work? Josh Slocum going far beyond the strength elements in the Foundation series in five? (IIRC) Dillon starting earlier and doing it in four?

Foundation 1 is the basics from he ground up. How much are you going to benefit from specialised work until you have done the prep work? That's the whole thing about PE before SE.

To be fair, those are all figures for young athletes with lots of time and dedication. Someone who's older and doesn't train as much could take longer. But the point still stands that Foundation is not a strict schedule: you go at the pace best suited for your abilities. If you're already reasonably fit and you put in a lot of effort, you can get through it in much faster than 5.5 years. 

Joshua Slocum said:

 If you're already reasonably fit and you put in a lot of effort, you can get through it in much faster than 5.5 years. 

Well, that is definitely good news, because in 5.5 years I will be 43 - not an age where you would usually expect to first attain a side lever. Really, my progress is not limited by the effort I put in, but by my restitution rate and the intensity I can train with safely. The time perspective of this program is so long that ageing is starting to be a factor!

And Charm - yes it would be great to see the timeline addressed in an FAQ - it would be very motivational to be able to visualise some attainments at certain times along the way. And as someone who has only bought F1, I do not have any idea of the contents and exercises in F2-4!

Anyway, thanks, I will combine the F1 training (PE1 in all exercises) with two shortish runs a week and a little handstanding and trust that that is the best I can do for my body right now.

If I get all the nifty moves in 5.5 years I'll be happy. Nothing worthwhile is easily obtained.

(I'm betting ABH and ABR accounts for just half of those 5.5 years .

Michael Borregaard said:

Michael Borregaard said:

... I would like to be able to trust that the workout I do ... catches all the small stabilising core and joint muscles required to train safely.

Michael Borregaard said:

I really want a program I can trust to take care of the details, so I will not have to give it too much thinking ... Complete for me is defined as a program that gives me that security.

I also wonder about why the course is offered together with a handstand course. Does that mean that this course is only complete when combined with that course? (if so, then why are they separate?). Or does it mean that this course is complete if I combine it with (wall) handstands? Or do I not have to worry about missing important parts of training without the handstand bit?

Michael Borregaard said:

...

Michael Borregaard said:

 Anyway, thanks, I will combine the F1 training (PE1 in all exercises) with two shortish runs a week and a little handstanding and trust that that is the best I can do for my body right now.

 

IMO the Foundation program is superb at catching stabilizing muscles and joint connective tissue for safe training. I'm 34 now and my flexibility (specifically pike) is better now than it ever has been, and my overall tendonitis levels are at an all-time low. 

You might find, especially as you learn about ABH (it has its own dedicated topic on the forums ... last I saw it was up to 15 pages), that the details in the techniques are not trivial. While you certainly can trust that the Foundation series covers them, you will also find that there are nuances and subtleties that you need to pay attention to. I find myself thinking about this stuff a lot more than I was thinking about StrongLifts 5x5.

I've seen it posted elsewhere that handstands are less about strength and more about skill. That, plus there's enough content in H1 to justify a separate course, is probably why they're sold separately (though I don't want to put words in Coach Sommers' mouth). You're absolutely fine doing one without the other, and I wouldn't call it "incomplete." Maybe it is on some level though; like if you're a foodie and think fine dining must be paired with fine wine to be considered a "complete meal." If you do H1, you will learn handstands. I personally am doing both, and really enjoying it. 

Good luck! And I mean that in all sincerity : ). Keep progressing even if you think it seems easy, which it probably will at first. I think Coach Sommer wrote in BtGB that "feeling tired is not a good indicator of getting stronger, only measured progress is" but it might have been somewhere else; in any case, I suggest using that as your metric for whether you have a good workout routine, and using fatigue as a measure of whether or not you're overtraining. I think you can count on the progressions kicking your ass eventually ;-).

Michael Borregaard said:

Well, that is definitely good news, because in 5.5 years I will be 43 - not an age where you would usually expect to first attain a side lever. Really, my progress is not limited by the effort I put in, but by my restitution rate and the intensity I can train with safely. The time perspective of this program is so long that ageing is starting to be a factor!

 

Actually, the honesty of this program in stating that things take not only time, but a lot of time, is what makes it a gem for oldish people like myself, currently 37. It means that we can actually expect to attain our goals in a relatively predictable timeframe, rather than being led to believe that it is possible to attain goal X in 90 days following the latest magical program. There's a lot of bullshit in the fitness industry, but rest assured that this program is the real deal. I find it reassuring to know that this project takes time, and since I know I'm going to be training anyhow, I might as well make the most of my time, and attain some goals that are incredible yet realistic.

Michael Borregaard said:

Am really looking forward to the more complex exercises, though, it is the complexity that attracted me to this training.

 

 

Well, so am I, and it took a lot of ego management to (temporarily) drop the complex exercises and move back to the basics. But to illustrate the point about progress being measured in actual progress, not perceived exertion, consider this move.

Before beginning Foundation I just couldn't do it, even though I was training more complex stuff like muscle-ups, HeSPU, tuck side lever pulls, negative Bowers etc. The other day I decided I might try again, just to do some fun stuff for the community compilation video, and I got it in very few attempts. It's ugly, so I need to work on the form, but the strength and coordination is there, and this is solely from doing the very basic stuff in F1.

Next case, your honour 

Ravn + Wamaler: Thanks both, those two replies fully resolve my question, and I feel much more motivated now to get into the basic details (in spite of my 'advanced age'. I am especially convinced by Ravn's argument that it is a very good thing that GB is not full of bullshit like most of the other stuff I have encountered.
Also, very nice move :-)

Though I am clearly not as strong as most people on this forum, I am actually OK with ABH. It must be a side effect of many years of yoga...

Ravn said:

(...) consider this move. (...)

Very nice

These statements touch on the single biggest benefit of F1 for me:

"in 5.5 years I will be 43".

"currently 37"

If I'd had F1 in my 20's or 30's I'd be in a helluva lot better condition today

Very tight shoulders, immobile hips, etc. from years and years of working at a desk.

I doubt this would've changed appreciably if not for F1.

Even though I was actively exercising, "stretching," etc.

I am quite certain, thanks to my current progress and that of the forum, that I will be more

mobile than I was at 20, if I am consistent.

Never mind the excellent strength gains, reaching and maintaining the mobility will pay dividends for decades.

My age-adjusted math says: great mobility at 65 > Victorian at 21.

Good luck with your training!

The best time to start F1 was 20 years ago;

The second best time is right now!  

~ Parodie of an African proverb about the best time to plant a tree