Starting Strength and other reading

[cXs808]

Ordered. Now i just have to wait, fuck.

 

[MatterOverMind]

Download the e-book "From the ground up" by Dan John. You won't be sorry.

Free ebook link

 

[romistrub]

Hate to bump an ancient thread, but also hate starting a new one when unnecessary.

I'm looking for a book that won't spoon feed me a routine. I want to know *why* you need ME and DE, why some sets are ramped and others not, why why why. I want to be able to adapt my strength strategy constantly based on my body's feedback.

Suggestions?

 

[easternbloc7]

Science and Practice of Strength Training is one of Louie Simmons' most referenced books. I haven't read it, but I would assume it would get into what you're looking for.

 

[MMAFan232]

No bs speed manual and vertical jump bible by kelly baggett are great. Infinite Intensity by ross is also very good as well as mark ripetoe's practical programming.

 

[eclipse]

ordering my copy of Rippetoe's book from Amazon but there is Starting strength, and starting strength second edition. Should i just get the second edition or both? Opinions?

be sure to get practical programming too

cant find supertraining by mel siff anywhere on amazon etc. i think one place but wont ship internationally. or the strongest shall survive by bill starr

i ordered the Westside Barbell BOOK of METHODS tho

 

[Deleted member 130905]

Science and Practice of Strength Training is one of Louie Simmons' most referenced books. I haven't read it, but I would assume it would get into what you're looking for.

I bought it and it is VERY, VERY dry and boring. I didn't get through much of it because I felt like it was so over complicated when just trying to say simple things.

 

[Donut62]

Hate to bump an ancient thread, but also hate starting a new one when unnecessary.

I'm looking for a book that won't spoon feed me a routine. I want to know *why* you need ME and DE, why some sets are ramped and others not, why why why. I want to be able to adapt my strength strategy constantly based on my body's feedback.

Suggestions?

Supertraining and/or Science and Practice of Strength Training. It's heavy on the science stuff, if you don't have a lot of education in basic sciences they would be a very difficult read.

 

[Merrill]

I bought it and it is VERY, VERY dry and boring. I didn't get through much of it because I felt like it was so over complicated when just trying to say simple things.

The same can be said of Programming and Organization of Training by Verkhoshansky

 

[cockysprinter]

i would say that if you have supertraining, science and practice of strength training, and periodization: theory and methodology you have pretty much everything youll ever need to know about lifting.

 

[EZA]

I have a secret for anyone who thinks Verkhoshansky and Zatsiorsky are overcomplicating simple things: Human Performance is complicated! The reality is that 99% of books out there and training information you've read is actually oversimplifying very complicated things.

How the body works, how it adapts to training, how it improves, etc. is incredibly complicated because these things involve virtually ever major system within the body - many of which we don't fully understand.

We've been studying muscles for hundreds of years and millions upon millions of dollars have been spent on research and yet we still don't know at a fundamental level the exact causes of muscular fatigue and there are many unanswered questions about the sliding filament theory of muscular contraction.

The inner workings of the human body are infiniately complex and how they all work together in the context of performance is not something that anybody has even close to all the answers to.

Other books you've read haven't even scratched the surface of what human performance really is and Zatsiorsky and Verkhoshansky are simply at a much higher level than what you've read. These are two of the greatest sports scientists of our time, Verkhoshansky literally pioneered the concept of plyometrics and vastly expanded our knowledge of human performance through his work.

If you want to read simple books and get the same results as everyone else by all means don't read Zatsiorsky, Verkhoshansky or any one of a number of other authors who are too complicated.

 

[Hexagon]

Now you made me wanna read those books.

Thanks.

 

[ghostwipe]

I have a secret for anyone who thinks Verkhoshansky and Zatsiorsky are overcomplicating simple things: Human Performance is complicated! The reality is that 99% of books out there and training information you've read is actually oversimplifying very complicated things.

How the body works, how it adapts to training, how it improves, etc. is incredibly complicated because these things involve virtually ever major system within the body - many of which we don't fully understand.

We've been studying muscles for hundreds of years and millions upon millions of dollars have been spent on research and yet we still don't know at a fundamental level the exact causes of muscular fatigue and there are many unanswered questions about the sliding filament theory of muscular contraction.

The inner workings of the human body are infiniately complex and how they all work together in the context of performance is not something that anybody has even close to all the answers to.

Other books you've read haven't even scratched the surface of what human performance really is and Zatsiorsky and Verkhoshansky are simply at a much higher level than what you've read. These are two of the greatest sports scientists of our time, Verkhoshansky literally pioneered the concept of plyometrics and vastly expanded our knowledge of human performance through his work.

It's hard to stay abreast of all the new research in the sports science field; if you wouldn't mind, it'd be great if you could post links to articles or other sources for relevant new info, studies, etc. Especially concerning sports science, muscle adaptation and its correlations to the central nervous system.

 

[oxcart]

I have a secret for anyone who thinks Verkhoshansky and Zatsiorsky are overcomplicating simple things: Human Performance is complicated! The reality is that 99% of books out there and training information you've read is actually oversimplifying very complicated things.

........

If you want to read simple books and get the same results as everyone else by all means don't read Zatsiorsky, Verkhoshansky or any one of a number of other authors who are too complicated.

There's a difference between explaining a complicated topic and overcomplicating a topic. Science & Practice of Strength training is (IMO) unnecessarily complicated. For example - RFD has been explained by many authors. The Zat explanation is the most complicated one I've seen.

 

[oxcart]

Double.

 

[oxcart]

Chaos Mitten you've read thibs book and didn't like it?

I would have thought Boye'se book would be informative, even if I don't like his uber-patronizing writing style.

There's nothing wrong with Boyle's book. It's a perfectly sensible book about athletic development for sports rather than PL/OL.

- importance of conditioning for athletes
- importance of balance between strength: hamstring vs quad
- importance of balance between strength: pull vs push
- medicine ball training
- unilateral work and general prehab
- brief mention of o-lifting
- few templates to show it all together

What's the problem?

 

[EZA]

RFD is a good example, it has been explained by many others, but mostly their explanations are incorrect or overly simplified. Rate of Force Development is a principle of physics and Zatsiorsky is one of the premier sports biomechanists, of course he's going to give a more complicated view of it, but it's also more in depth and will give you a greater understanding. Reading many other authors take on it doesn't give you the full picture of it and largely oversimplifies a complicated topic.

Read those other authors and then explain to me exactly what RFD is, how it relates to training, what are the factors that determine it, how it's best improved, what are the limiting factors, etc.

I would also say Science and Practice of Strength Training is not very complicated at all generally speaking, his other works that are biomechanic books are far more complicated as are Verkhoshansky's and one of my favorite authors Atko Viru's best books are way out there but they have tremendously valuable information.

You also don't need to understand everything you read to be able to gain something from reading it. Even if you think the book is overly complicated you will still find something in there that is helpful to your training. I've learned a great deal from books I could barely understand at different points because in the process of trying to figure out what they are talking about you learn more than you ever will reading something simple and easy to read.

 

[Deleted member 130905]

RFD is a good example, it has been explained by many others, but mostly their explanations are incorrect or overly simplified. Rate of Force Development is a principle of physics and Zatsiorsky is one of the premier sports biomechanists, of course he's going to give a more complicated view of it, but it's also more in depth and will give you a greater understanding. Reading many other authors take on it doesn't give you the full picture of it and largely oversimplifies a complicated topic.

Read those other authors and then explain to me exactly what RFD is, how it relates to training, what are the factors that determine it, how it's best improved, what are the limiting factors, etc.

I would also say Science and Practice of Strength Training is not very complicated at all generally speaking, his other works that are biomechanic books are far more complicated as are Verkhoshansky's and one of my favorite authors Atko Viru's best books are way out there but they have tremendously valuable information.

You also don't need to understand everything you read to be able to gain something from reading it. Even if you think the book is overly complicated you will still find something in there that is helpful to your training. I've learned a great deal from books I could barely understand at different points because in the process of trying to figure out what they are talking about you learn more than you ever will reading something simple and easy to read.

I always have and always will suck in science, so maybe that's why I had a hard time understanding it. The book was also VERY dry, which compounded its difficulty.

Also, I'm not going anywhere in strength training besides having some fun and joining some amateur competitions. Knowing every detail of everything involved in what I do in the gym, while it would be awesome to know, isn't a necessity to me. For you, it is because it's your profession. Different point of views is all it I guess.

 

[EZA]

Have you read Supertraining? Now that's dry material, I didn't think Science and Practice was that dry really but it's all a matter of perspective. If you want to really see dry look at Zatsiorky's book "Kinematics of Human Motion" now that is dry reading. On another note, it's sad to me is that Zatsiorsky is at Penn State but because they're a HIT program he's had no input or say in the strength and conditioning programs at that school, it's totally ridiculous.

 

[ronin0352]

Have you read Supertraining? Now that's dry material, I didn't think Science and Practice was that dry really but it's all a matter of perspective. If you want to really see dry look at Zatsiorky's book "Kinematics of Human Motion" now that is dry reading. On another note, it's sad to me is that Zatsiorsky is at Penn State but because they're a HIT program he's had no input or say in the strength and conditioning programs at that school, it's totally ridiculous.

Yeah, but your level of knowledge in the field is still enough to make most of us cringe. I have to read your articles twice to feel like I somewhat understand what the hell you're talking about. Not that I mind, I appreciate the knowledge you pass on.