foundation 1 and btgb: struggling with progress and high-low reps question

Hello to everyone.

It's a few months that I've started F1, and few weeks that I've started H1. I had previosly bought btgb as well.

I have to say that I'm really enthusiastic with the training and the site, the forum, etc. I've probably never felt strong and healty (at the same time) like now.

However, I have a question.

Premise: my progress are really fast on Manna and straight arm exercise. But, like many other people I've ridden about in this forum, I'm starting having some problems with the progressions in other exercises (particularly in the last microcycle of push-up and ground row). My strategy for now it's just to add few repetions week by week, respectring the deload weeks. I know that this is quite normal, I'm not in a hurry and I've followed religiously since now the F1 program giving great attention to the form.

Doubt: at this point one thought came up in my mind. What's the reason of the different approach suggested in F1 (high repetions, at least in the first steps) and the following suggestion extracted from btgb, p. 175: "When building basic strength, it is best to employ a low repetition, low volume scheme for any given exercise. This general template coupled with various set construction options will be suitable for the vast majority of athletes. Most trainees should plan on working in sets of either 3x3 or 3x5; with all of these being work sets."

The high repetition structure is only for very basic exercises (even though it doesn't feel like it to us ). It's not long before you are working generally in sets of 5x5.

Much of the material in BtBG can now be considered for advanced beginner / intermediate students of GST, specially with regards to programming, like the steady state cycle, etc. It probably stems from more experience on Coach's part with adult GST beginners compared with the time BtBG was written.

Foundation is for  beginners and beginners need the high volume / low intensity movements first to build strength in the basic gymnastic shapes (like hollow and arch holds) and the high reps for bent arm strength for initial conditioning and joint prep. It's also a good way to ingrain efficient movement patterns as even trivial movements like pushups and rows have their details when done in Foundation. It also teaches character as nothing worth having should be easy.

thanks to both.

so you don't suggest the approach I was hypothezing for ground row (goal 5x10) and push up (5x15), do you?

it's just that after few weeks that I don't see particular improving, I thought: why don't try with btgb approach: gain strenght with low reps (in one of the two training of the week - I do the 4 days program) and using it for the F1 goal.

Angelo85 said:

thanks to both.

 

so you don't suggest the approach I was hypothezing for ground row (goal 5x10) and push up (5x15), do you?

If you are adding a rep here and there, I don't see why you would change too much. They'll add up as you adapt.

It's fine to try out harder movements of course, but keep your current focus as your priority Personally I prefer to add a few more sets of the element I'm working currently if I'm hitting a plateau, to get more total volume/practice at the movement.

I added one reps every week on the push up, in the last 3-4 weeks, and it seems ok. It's less ok with ground row...4x6 (with good form) are ok, but already at 4x7 I have problems: the series 3 it's not perfect, and in the last one I can't make a good 7 (I have to say that I go particularly slow, like 2 seconds to pull and 2 seconds to lower the body)

For ground rows, consider adding reps when considering total volume, instead of adding one per set. So instead of 4x7 do 7, 7, 6, 6, 6, for example and keep adding. You could also consider aiming for 4x8 for example, and in the sets that you are failing, when you think that you are not going to do a good rep (for me basically that is failing to touch the rings to the shoulders) just stop, sit, let go of the rings and take a 5 second breather while shaking your limbs. You'll find that you'll be a able to squeeze one or two more reps and soon enough you'll not need the rest at the same point of failure.

I think I'll try that! Basically it's a stop-and-go...thanks!

Perhaps failing so early in the progression means that you have not first really mastered the first two progressions or advanced too quickly through the current progression?

I really don't think so. I was really meticulous in the previous progressions, and if I failed it's because I am very strict with the form and the tempo (at least 2-2).

For example I can without problem do handstand push ups (but not with perfect form) and other harder stuff, but I wanted however not to rush in F1 and so I followed religiously the program...

Wow, this is really interesting! maybe this is exactly my problem...many thanks.

I've always done slow movements because in some of the videos (for example exactly the ground rows) the athletes move really slow...so I've taken that for a general rule. Probably I was wrong.

Zach Armijo said:

It needs to be shown slow because people need to analyze the movements and gives them a much more clear idea of what is going on. I respect and applaud your efforts in a strict tempo, but for higher volume, it isn't necessary.  

I understand. This make a lot of sense and explain a lot. In fact, with high reps and slow movements the sessions become sometimes also quite long, and somewhere I've nevertheless read that our training should not be very long (20-40 min). More generally this explain why I'm struggling with a simple 5x15 push ups (with the slow tempo and the short rest time, it become a kind of endurance exercise).

Since now on, I'll change approach. Many, many thanks.

Zach Armijo said:

Worry about tempos for the 5 rep exercises. For now just focus on controlled, smooth movements. You are just burning yourself out on something basic with the longer TUT and it isn't necessary.

Is that the official take on this question?

FredInChina said:

Is that the official take on this question?

I think so. 

And however it makes sense...

Zach Armijo said:

It needs to be shown slow because people need to analyze the movements and gives them a much more clear idea of what is going on. I respect and applaud your efforts in a strict tempo, but for higher volume, it isn't necessary.  

It is more than a week old, but I would like to bump this one. Is this true? Because just a little bit faster tempo (not fast, just faster) feels so much better on these high rep movements, the slow super slow ones are taking too much time to be true :S

Norbert Marko said:

It is more than a week old, but I would like to bump this one. Is this true? Because just a little bit faster tempo (not fast, just faster) feels so much better on these high rep movements, the slow super slow ones are taking too much time to be true :S

Giving that apparently I wasn't the only one using a very slow tempo, it would be wonderful if someone else could confirm the Zach opinion. It's not that I have many doubt about the exactness of what he thinks anyway: for me it makes sense, but I'm not an expert...

I say that it makes sense because of this: I've noticed that a lot of people already struggle with this relatively simple exercise. The reasons could be two: 1) we are very weak and untrained, and we need a lot of time to gain strenght; 2) we do something wrong.

I exclude the first one not because of self esteem issues, but because I've noticed that every time I keep up a new exercise (for example headstand or hanstand press, but also ground row or diamond push ups) I improve quite fast in strenght until the repetions remain in the low range and strenght-demanding (always keeping good form!); at the opposite, when the repetions range becomes higher, the improvements in strenght become really slow, if not inexistent.

So, in my opinion the possibility 1) it's not right: it has to be the 2).

At this point I tought the problem could be exactly in the repetions range: because I had in mind what The Coach said in btgb. But the tempo question also makes sense; Zach is more expert than me, and I'll try to follow his suggestion.

Angelo85 said:

 (...) The reasons could be two: 1) we are very weak and untrained, and we need a lot of time to gain strenght; 2) we do something wrong.

(...) in my opinion the possibility 1) it's not right: it has to be the 2).

The third possibility is that it doesn't matter... [warning, out on a limb with an unproven theory!]

At that level of strength, at the F1 level, if you go at a faster tempo, it is a bit easier, and you progress more rapidly through the sequence until you reach a point where progress stalls and at that point you must pay your dues to the Gods of exercise...

OR,

You use a slower tempo; it requires a little bit more time to master, but maybe the muse won't let you stall and you'll be able to keep going at that pace...

In any event, keep at it, in two years time, you'll laugh at the newbies getting stuck where you are at now.

Can confirm Zach's 'opinion' (not an opinion as correct). Do the reps, don't use momentum, do prioritise the cues and major points of the exercise. Otherwise, feel ok with being a bit individual in your execution of rep

Keep in mind the standards of the athletes in the courses. They are absolute machines. You are not being asked to perform reps to the standard of Allan Bower. The videos are the ideal you should absolutely strive for. Is it realistic any of us can perform arch body rocks to Dillons standard with only arch holds under our belts? Hell no, the guy is ridiculous, and at his level the stress of performing much better Abr than us is *below* negligible.

Hmm, this discussion also has relevance for me. I'm doing hollow body rocks at the moment, and for the life of me, I can't work out the mechanics of the movement; the form is sh*t, arms and legs flailing about like an epileptic seizure. In time, I'll probably get it somewhere near acceptable, but nowhere near as pretty as what the athlete in the video is doing. Maybe this is an ongoing process of polishing the form (but also keeping in mind that a turd cannot be polished to a high gloss)?

Thank you guys for your advices.

Will post a video of hollow hold and rocks in a couple of days, could really use the feedback.

Zach Armijo said:

smooth controlled motion. Again, control, control, control.

Even given a bit of individual difference, we should all be striving for the perfect reps demonstrated in most of the videos. I am just saying its necessary to train eg) arch rocks for eg) six months only if it's necessary for an athlete to complete them. Its not necessary to put eg) archups completely on hold for six months so that you can work up to perfect reps. You have the conditioning at that point. You'll improve, but your focused effort is better put elsewhere

You'll then keep prior elements in you warmup for a long time and they will keep improving. Meanwhile harder conditioning calls.

This is very good news!

Jon Douglas said:

The high repetition structure is only for very basic exercises (even though it doesn't feel like it to us ). It's not long before you are working generally in sets of 5x5.

That's good, because I feel that I have very poor muscle endurance (quick lactic acid build up maybe?). Maybe I'm just imagining it and I'm not very strong, but I've always felt that for the years I've been working out.