Most lifters are still beginners, Rippetoe Article

[James Fuller]

There is a very interesting article over at tnation about how most of us are still capable of big gains and is further proof in my mind that 1. Rip is the fucking man, "I always stress common sense over conventiona wisdom," he says, "Especially when that conventional wisdom is patent bullshit." 2. Keep it simple! Lift the big lifts hard dont get caught up in complex fancy programs.

Anyway here is the link I know alot of folks like knighttemplar and others are big Rippetoe fans:T NATION | Most Lifters are Still Beginners

 

[KnightTemplar]

Thanks for the link, James. Classic Rippetoe!

 

[J Turner]

"We do it all the time. We don't have peer review but we do it anyway."

Nice read

 

[ThePitBull32]

"We do it all the time. We don't have peer review but we do it anyway."

Nice read

That was a great way to end the article. He's the man.

 

[yocan]

and people ask me why I don't do periodization, I don't warrant it.

 

[James Fuller]

Thanks for the link, James. Classic Rippetoe!

I am not quite such a big cock smoke if I dont have a fight coming up lol.

 

[KnightTemplar]

I am not quite such a big cock smoke if I dont have a fight coming up lol.

When are you fighting?

 

[James Fuller]

When are you fighting?

Just had one lol. Technical submission loss rnc on suspension till nov probably going to fight again in janurary.

 

[KnightTemplar]

and people ask me why I don't do periodization, I don't warrant it.

Jim Wendler wants a word...

 

[KnightTemplar]

Just had one lol. Technical submission loss rnc on suspension till nov probably going to fight again in janurary.

That sucks, man. But hey, at least you had the guts to step in the Ring/Cage. That's more than most Sherdoggers(including me)have done!

 

[James Fuller]

Jim Wendler wants a word...

I think he is just echoing the articles theme of simple load progression for beginners and only messing with perodization once you get to a certain level a bit futher on the horizon.

 

[KnightTemplar]

I think he is just echoing the articles theme of simple load progression for beginners and only messing with perodization once you get to a certain level a bit futher on the horizon.

Interestingly, while 5/3/1 is regarded by most on Sherdog as a program for Intermediate and Advanced lifters, Wendler himself says that he has used it successfully to train Noob lifters.

 

[Tosa]

Interestingly, while 5/3/1 is regarded by most on Sherdog as a program for Intermediate and Advanced lifters, Wendler himself says that he has used it successfully to train Noob lifters.

Additionally, I recall seeing on the EliteFTS Q&A, a question about whether a noob should do starting strength or 5/3/1, and his answer being something along the lines of "either".

Flexible programs, or a set of training methods can work from noobs to advanced lifters. This includes the Wendler 5/3/1, Sheiko and Westside...how a noob did any of these programs would probably be very different than an advanced lifter.

The issue is that a noob probably isn't able to properly do such a routine by himself, and because of that is better off doing a routine that's harder to fuck up, and with nice clear guidelines of how to do it, and what to do if he get stuck...like Starting Strength.

 

[TrainingAdict]

If a noob uses SS or wendler's program and eat big, he will still make huge progress.

3-4-10 years down the line, it would have been insignificant which program he chose.

 

[Arpie]

Rip is the man, although I think he falls short on his nutrition advice (in that article especially). There is a maximum cap on the amount of muscle a person (even a teen) can pack on (something like 1/2 a pound a week with a 500 kcal surplus each day). Its up to the trainee to figure out his/her intake in order to support growth.

Anything above that just is stored as fat (put simply), now this isn't necessarily a bad thing, however before the age of 20-22 a developing body increases the number of fat cells as well as their size. This number remains constant after the ages of 20-22 and throughout the rest of adult life, their size fluctuates according to periods of weight-loss. Fat cells can't be removed (save surgically) during a weight-loss phase or "cut", they just reduce in size. Yes fat cells do die (adipose apoptosis) but are replaced (as far as I know).

Thats why childhood obesity predisposes an individual to adult obesity. Yes, I think that eating big to get strong is necessary and this "hawt abz" fad is stupid. But I think it should be done within reason. Being fit for a task and being healthy are two different things.

I'm no expert, nor am I claiming to know more than Rip. I think he's a brilliant coach and educator, but that dosen't put him above being (slightly) wrong.

 

[Morganation]

I always like his articles.Makes me want to go to the gym right now if it was open.

 

[ExtremeStandard]

Awesome link, informative, funny to me at least, and something for everyone.

 

[TheThreadJudge]

doing a challenging conditioning workout between workouts has made me gain like a begginer again

Rip is the man, although I think he falls short on his nutrition advice (in that article especially). There is a maximum cap on the amount of muscle a person (even a teen) can pack on (something like 1/2 a pound a week with a 500 kcal surplus each day). Its up to the trainee to figure out his/her intake in order to support growth.

Anything above that just is stored as fat (put simply), now this isn't necessarily a bad thing, however before the age of 20-22 a developing body increases the number of fat cells as well as their size. This number remains constant after the ages of 20-22 and throughout the rest of adult life, their size fluctuates according to periods of weight-loss. Fat cells can't be removed (save surgically) during a weight-loss phase or "cut", they just reduce in size. Yes fat cells do die (adipose apoptosis) but are replaced (as far as I know).

Thats why childhood obesity predisposes an individual to adult obesity. Yes, I think that eating big to get strong is necessary and this "hawt abz" fad is stupid. But I think it should be done within reason. Being fit for a task and being healthy are two different things.

I'm no expert, nor am I claiming to know more than Rip. I think he's a brilliant coach and educator, but that dosen't put him above being (slightly) wrong.

that was pretty mind expanding. To confirm, where do you get your info?

I was pretty low body fat until 20-21 when I gained some fat to bulk. I think I increased my fat cells, DOH

 

[KnightTemplar]

Additionally, I recall seeing on the EliteFTS Q&A, a question about whether a noob should do starting strength or 5/3/1, and his answer being something along the lines of "either".

Flexible programs, or a set of training methods can work from noobs to advanced lifters. This includes the Wendler 5/3/1, Sheiko and Westside...how a noob did any of these programs would probably be very different than an advanced lifter.

The issue is that a noob probably isn't able to properly do such a routine by himself, and because of that is better off doing a routine that's harder to fuck up, and with nice clear guidelines of how to do it, and what to do if he get stuck...like Starting Strength.

Good post, Tosa.

For what it's worth, my own opinion is that SS is definately better for a total Noob; someone who has'nt done any weight training, or who has only used machines. As Tosa points out, SS is hard to fuck up as long as you follow the program to the letter. The downside is the program can get boring as you are basically doing the same workout, with minor variations, every time you hit the gym.

A Noob with slightly more experiance - I consider a Noob to be someone who cannot Bench their own bodyweight and/or Squat 1.5 their bodyweight - can make big gains on 5/3/1. As long as they, or someone they train with, can follow the program correctly; start light, pick the right assistance exercises etc.

The advantage Starting Strength has over 5/3/1 is that it is based on the KISS Principal: Keep It Simple Stupid.

5/3/1 Scores over SS in it's ability to be fine-tuned by the lifter; only the main lifts/rep system is written in stone. Wendler leaves the assistance exercises up to the individual lifter.

In the end, both Mark and Jim have forgotten more about Strength Training than I or the vast majority of Sherdoggers will ever know. One can't go far wrong by following one of their programs.

 

[miaou]

Rip is the man, although I think he falls short on his nutrition advice (in that article especially). There is a maximum cap on the amount of muscle a person (even a teen) can pack on (something like 1/2 a pound a week with a 500 kcal surplus each day). Its up to the trainee to figure out his/her intake in order to support growth.

Anything above that just is stored as fat (put simply), now this isn't necessarily a bad thing, however before the age of 20-22 a developing body increases the number of fat cells as well as their size. This number remains constant after the ages of 20-22 and throughout the rest of adult life, their size fluctuates according to periods of weight-loss. Fat cells can't be removed (save surgically) during a weight-loss phase or "cut", they just reduce in size. Yes fat cells do die (adipose apoptosis) but are replaced (as far as I know).

Thats why childhood obesity predisposes an individual to adult obesity. Yes, I think that eating big to get strong is necessary and this "hawt abz" fad is stupid. But I think it should be done within reason. Being fit for a task and being healthy are two different things.

I'm no expert, nor am I claiming to know more than Rip. I think he's a brilliant coach and educator, but that dosen't put him above being (slightly) wrong.

This is not something I've looked into, so I am only using my common sense here and please feel free to provide sources in order to enlighten me. But..!

Here is what makes my common sense tingle: Who cares how many fat cells you have? If you are eating more than you are burning you will increase your body fat, regardless of how many fat cells you've got. Why on earth would you worry weather you have a whole lot of average-sized fat cells, or a few less but bigger fat cells, since the total amount of fat would be the same?

My common sense also protests the notion that more fat cells predispose you to being a fat turd. Habits that result in you eating more than you burn predispose you to being a fat turd (and that includes eating shitty kind's of food in disproportionate amounts of the calories you burn from your life-style and amount of exercise). It doesn't make much sense that if you are on x amount of calories surplus and have many fat cells you will get fatter than if you eat the same food but have less fat cells. Everything else (besides specific organic anomalies) sounds just like an excuse not to get off your ass ("oh I was fat as a kid, so I have more fat cells, so now I can't lose weight any more" spoken with a lisp).

To put simply: being a fat turd predisposes you to being a fat turd. And, seeing as your behavioral habits while you are young predispose you to your behavioral habits when you're a grownup, being a fat turd when you are young predisposes you to being a fat turd when you're an adult (and, obviously, you could still change it anytime you gather enough willpower and discipline). Why is there a need to complicate things further?

Your post sounds suspiciously close to an assertion, but again, feel free to prove me wrong, you will be doing me a favor by educating me.