Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Purchased the WALKMAN W273S head set to belt out aggressive tunes to myself whilst training and swimming.

Excellent for only $70, really light and secure even doing wild out of control last sets of sleds.

Haven't swam in them yet but I did shower in them which was interesting.

  • Like 1

New squat PB of 80kg x 20 reps, all ass to ground and high bar. Up 5 reps from 15 last session.

WOW, simply one of the most intense pieces of exercise I have ever done. It is 99% a mental battle, standing there with the bar across your traps, the weight feeling heavier and heavier as time goes by, struggling to catch your breath and wanting to throw in the towel after every rep - I wanted to stop at 10 but had this insane drive to keep going and going. Racking it after 20 I promptly collapsed to the ground because my legs couldn't hold me up anymore lol. Took longer to catch my breath after that than my old 3km HIIT sprints used to.

So yes, painful and energy sapping as all hell, but so damn rewarding. Not looking forward to stairs and toilet seats tomorrow.

  • Like 2

I'm a bit sleight at the moment, weighing in at 81.5kg lastnight, so they were 98% bodyweight :)

Surprisingly my 1RM isn't going up, despite consistently adding a rep or two to the 80kg volume each session. Usually I can bounce one off the other (1RM vs volume) and vice versa.

With certainty in bench, I know that if I can get out 7-8 reps of 100 then I can do a single of 120 etc. Squats seems to be a different ball game!

A bit of empirical theory; I suspect that in the high volume squats I have more time during the set to gradually recruit each muscle in the chain, which could explain my second wind after 10 reps. Comparatively, a 1RM being a single rep, if you don't have everything doing it's part straight up, you won't be lifting to your potential. That and the lower weight squats are probably more controlled? Combination of lots of factors probably.

I'm a bit sleight at the moment, weighing in at 81.5kg lastnight, so they were 98% bodyweight :)

Surprisingly my 1RM isn't going up, despite consistently adding a rep or two to the 80kg volume each session. Usually I can bounce one off the other (1RM vs volume) and vice versa.

With certainty in bench, I know that if I can get out 7-8 reps of 100 then I can do a single of 120 etc. Squats seems to be a different ball game!

A bit of empirical theory; I suspect that in the high volume squats I have more time during the set to gradually recruit each muscle in the chain, which could explain my second wind after 10 reps. Comparatively, a 1RM being a single rep, if you don't have everything doing it's part straight up, you won't be lifting to your potential. That and the lower weight squats are probably more controlled? Combination of lots of factors probably.

I was under the impression that anything around 8rm+ doesn't have the carry over to 1rm.

That could certainly explain my observations, and also why 1RM calculators are limited to a 10 rep input...though I always thought that was because the algebraic equations would blow out reliability with any number higher than 10.

Probably also explains why my <10 rep sets are affected by my intensity during a prior 1RM, yet I always have room in the tank for the high volume weights.

Would like to know the physiology behind it. Slow vs fast twitch fibers being used for one and not the other?

Can we therefore assume that if these different "strengths" operate independantly of one another, I could train both rep ranges in the one session (as I'm doing now) without them negatively impacting each other? Creating a rounded combination of strength and endurance?

As an aside to this, when I was training low weight bench for a couple weeks I got my 60kg reps up to about 27-28 and my 1RM was probably around 115, however during my strongest 1RM period (122.5kg), when I had mostly been focusing on low rep sets, I gave the 60kg challenge a shot and only completed around 23 reps.

That could certainly explain my observations, and also why 1RM calculators are limited to a 10 rep input...though I always thought that was because the algebraic equations would blow out reliability with any number higher than 10.

Probably also explains why my <10 rep sets are affected by my intensity during a prior 1RM, yet I always have room in the tank for the high volume weights.

Would like to know the physiology behind it. Slow vs fast twitch fibers being used for one and not the other?

Can we therefore assume that if these different "strengths" operate independantly of one another, I could train both rep ranges in the one session (as I'm doing now) without them negatively impacting each other? Creating a rounded combination of strength and endurance?

Depends I guess, your training methods have proved to be slow progressing in the max/1rm scale (not starting an argument).. So they must affect each other.

If you focused on one or the other in cycles I'd assume you'd have greater (quicker) results in both areas.

Most training cycles start with higher volume/intensity in the earlier weeks and taper down to peaking. But, they are generally always reps for more weight, not weight for more reps.

  • 2 weeks later...

Morning all.

I'm still here, doing little more than maintenance these days due to work, not great sleep, long winter season of illness etc. Lost 5-6kgs (not intentionally and it sucks, but hey, more abs) and am only getting 3x 30-40min sessions a week these days so unsurprisingly my strength/size has/is also going backwards.

Because I cannot easily control the factors affecting it, what's the best approach to try and minimise the losses? Drop the weight so I can get out the full rep/set scheme (3x8 in most cases, 2x15 on squats bu they are only light and are a special case due to my back) or continue doing what I've been doing which is struggle but keep adding sets to get the full volume out. as in 8, 8, 5, 3 or 8, 7, 6, 3 etc.

Good to see you guys (and Leesh) still cranking out your sessions :D

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Latest Posts

    • I get into huffs with people when I suggest the MX5 looks so much better as a coupe than it does as convertible. Pretty sure I don't prefer the convertible version of anything. Good job on the hardtop! The next buyer will appreciate.
    • IMO wrap does have its uses, but like you said, quality wrap, and professional installation, would probably cost want a quality paint job does, but, the paint, if maintained, is basically for life, and much easier to touch up if required  In other news: it's pissing down here, with thunder, lightning and only some small hail "at this stage", luckily all "my" cars are undercover  I've also been contacted by a guy in Newcastle about the SS, he said he will come down next weekend for a look, we'll see how that transpires I guess 🫰
    • Nah, I'm not an a-hole, ha ha!   I do like the colour match. Some of the carbon fibre wraps are quite freaking horrible. There's one a local company I know uses, and it looks damn good! Also very very expensive per metre to buy! ha ha ha It might be cheaper to respray the roof than use the good CF Wrap, ha ha!
    • Please noooooooo 😭 As for wrap, no thank you mate, I've seen and used "carbon fibre" wrap before, and for these hard tops, they look soooo good when colour matched Like this >>>
    • That depends, someone might offer me a good price to resell it Mark... Ha ha ha!   I can get it wrapped in a really nice looking carbon fiber vynil if you want?
×
×
  • Create New...