Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Markos, that gym looks amazing, you should collaborate with Trent from Sydney and get him to move from Lidcombe to Campbelltown/Liverpool.... would workout much better for me.

Seriously though, when you get a new client onto your beginner workout that you posted in the supplement page, you said to continually add weight every session, what do you do when the client has added the weight and no longer reaches the required reps?

I am currently doing a 5x5 program, made up of 2 days alternating

Squats, bench and seated row - Day 1

squats, military press and deadlifts (1 working set) - Day 2

I have found that I have started not hitting the 5 reps on squats and I reckon bench will be next.

Obviously no one can continue to add weight every session. So if your squat goes from 100kg x 20, next session you get 105kg x 16, then you aim for 17 or more and continue till you make 105kg x 20.

Now, if you get 105 x 16, then the following session is 105 x 16, you havent progressed, we simply do another set

Every session needs to contain one of the 3 "mores"

More reps, more weight, more sets. I dont care which one, but every session needs to be progressive

Any session repeated is a step backwards, your not holding your ground, youve gone backwards. This is the whole premise of our training, and why you see ordinary people lifting extraordinary weight.

Do you guys really think I dont get surprised when a 65yo man deadlifts 210kg then has a knee replacement 3 days later, you wonder why I dont listen to "injured" lifters, or when a 14yo squats 170kg, or a 64kg girl deadlifts 170kg, or a 75yo man deadlift 150kg.

These lifters aren't special, not even close, they just progress everytime they are in the gym.

This, is the key element in training, the one most dont understand

Obviously no one can continue to add weight every session. So if your squat goes from 100kg x 20, next session you get 105kg x 16, then you aim for 17 or more and continue till you make 105kg x 20.

Now, if you get 105 x 16, then the following session is 105 x 16, you havent progressed, we simply do another set

Every session needs to contain one of the 3 "mores"

More reps, more weight, more sets. I dont care which one, but every session needs to be progressive

Any session repeated is a step backwards, your not holding your ground, youve gone backwards. This is the whole premise of our training, and why you see ordinary people lifting extraordinary weight.

Do you guys really think I dont get surprised when a 65yo man deadlifts 210kg then has a knee replacement 3 days later, you wonder why I dont listen to "injured" lifters, or when a 14yo squats 170kg, or a 64kg girl deadlifts 170kg, or a 75yo man deadlift 150kg.

These lifters aren't special, not even close, they just progress everytime they are in the gym.

This, is the key element in training, the one most dont understand

One thing about it that stumped me (though undoubtedly the common sense answer will prevail here) - when adding more weight, do we revert back to a default number of reps and sets? 3 session example on squats below:

Session 1:

100kg, 3 sets of 10 reps

Session 2:

100kg, 3 sets of 12 reps

Session 3:

105kg 3 sets of 10 or 12 reps?

Probably requires more than 3 sessions in the example to get my meaning across, but if we constantly add more reps/sets when we can't add weight, what do we do when we DO add weight? Revert back to the original number of reps/sets but with a new increased weight? Or do the same amount of reps/sets as the previous session.

I guess I'm just saying it's not logical to increase volume indefinitely, so surely there must be a reset when some requirement is met :)

You won't have to revert, Troy...the extra weight will make you push out less reps anyway. It's rare that you'll push out the same reps on a session where you increased the weight. If by chance you do, then the weight increase probably wasn't enough and you can push the weight up again.

Correct.

Dont think too much, simply do "more" each session, it doesnt have to be weight or reps, as long as its more.

Another trick is more work in less time, not a favourite or one that I use, but if you do more work in less time you have trained harder

I agree with that last one working...I was actually plateaued on bench press once and decreasing the intervals between sets is what broke me through it. Went from a 20 minute exercise to 18 minutes and I added 10-15kg to it over a few weeks.

There's only so much break cutting you can do before it becomes detrimental, though.

thanks Birdman............................................

 

I see you lurking Trent!!!

U got me.

If your stalling scale back the weights a bit and increase the reps. Get the volume in. I do this with my guys if they been stalling for over 2 weeks.

This is one way and eat up.

E.g

Set 1 100x5

Set 2 100x4 missed 5th rep

Then

Set 3 95x6 or 7.

Add a 4th of 95x3 if possible.

Then go eat.

Markos, do your lifters ever train calves in isolation? If not, why is this?

From an aesthetic point of view, it's something I don't want to neglect...but I'm curious about the strength point of view. Are they of no use or do they get worked enough in assistance exercises like farmers walk etc?

Not one of my powerlifters train calves directly, a few of the other clients do though.

I reckon they may get a little work pulling and squatting, but it would be very minor.

They dont train abs or forearms either

Calves would probably get the tiniest workout during squats, otherwise yeah as Markos points out I'm not surprised they don't bother with them. Given each muscle group only needs to be strong enough to support the others during each respective lift, calves etc would be getting their required workout simply from squats/deads.

Markos can confirm or tell me I'm a nutcase, but the way I see it is that isolation exercises are almost exclusively for aesthetic benefit. If you can complete your goal rep range on your compound lifts, then every muscle group being activated is obviously up to scratch for the task.

The only specific work I could be arsed giving my calves comes from walking around my work building on my toes, lol

Not one of my powerlifters train calves directly, a few of the other clients do though.

I reckon they may get a little work pulling and squatting, but it would be very minor.

They dont train abs or forearms either

I thought as much. Probably just extra weight to carry into competition lol

Calves would probably get the tiniest workout during squats, otherwise yeah as Markos points out I'm not surprised they don't bother with them. Given each muscle group only needs to be strong enough to support the others during each respective lift, calves etc would be getting their required workout simply from squats/deads.

Markos can confirm or tell me I'm a nutcase, but the way I see it is that isolation exercises are almost exclusively for aesthetic benefit. If you can complete your goal rep range on your compound lifts, then every muscle group being activated is obviously up to scratch for the task.

The only specific work I could be arsed giving my calves comes from walking around my work building on my toes, lol

Think you're forgetting rehab and targeting weakness in the range of a compound movement! I do think a lot of people turn to isolation before they actually need it, though...

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

    • The exhaust gases are at their highest temperature as they leave the exhaust port and enter the manifold. They cool as they flow through the manifold because they transfer heat to the manifold and the manifold loses heat to the surrounding environment. Thus, inevitably, the exhaust gases are cooler as they enter the turbo compared to when they entered the exhaust manifold. So, yes, the exhaust manifold can easily get as hot as the turbine housing. Having said that, you will generally see the highest temperatures where the exhaust gases have to slow down or they are concentrated into one area - which is usually the collector on the manifold and in the turbine housing, because the gases slam into the metal at those places, increasing the convective heat transfer coefficient and transferring even more heat to the metal than they might just flowing past elsewhere. Exhaust manifold heat shields are a good idea - certainly for the stock manifold they are there from the factory. People seldom have anything like that on a tubular manifold because they are hard to achieve. Some might wrap a tube manifold with fibreglass tape - but this has a reputation of leading to cracked welds. The best case is generally to put ceramic coating onto the manifold to prevent it getting as hot (internal coating) and radiating/convecting heat into the bay (external coating). All the real heat from a turbo comes from the exhaust side. The gases entering are at ~800-900°C and the steel/iron gets nearly that hot. The compressor side is only going to heat the charge air up to <<200°C (typically not much more than 100°C). So that's nothing, by comparison. The compressor is not a significant source of engine bay heat.
    • Late to the party, specifically joined this forum as I just bought one of these and this thread has been a gold mine of info. If the OP is still around, mind if I ask what gas you been putting in yours? Mine has a Japanese sticker in the cap saying premium but it seems to get way worse mileage on premium (95) than 91. I always thought it was meant to be the other way round🤷 I do think Nissans claimed "6l/100km" is a bit fantastical 😂
    • Does exhaust manifold get hot as turno exhuast side? I have a turbo cover to managr heat in the engine bay but  nothing is covering the exhaust manifold before turbo   i know as turbo does compress air, the temp does go up however does that mean exhaust manifold would be as hot?
    • It's excellent but I'm still breaking it in so I'm not 100% sure where it'll end up. I would say it's about 15% heavier than stock and the smoothness of the slip zone is quite progressive but you need to be a little patient compared to stock or it'll bite hard and stall. Stock I got away with absolutely horrid clutch control. Like I said before I couldn't even tell where the clutch would grab when it was stock so releasing way too quickly without enough revs it would just slip and the revs would drop lower than ideal but that would be the end of it. Currently there's a bit of a nasty clutch judder if I don't apply enough revs + find the exact wrong point of the slip point in the clutch pedal but it feels like it's slowly resolving as I drive it more. I would not recommend the competition clutch unless you really need the extra clamp force. I think this clutch combined with the Nismo operating cylinder is going to be exactly what I want. Enough bite that you need to remember the release point to avoid stalling or rough shifts, but progressive enough that it's not hard to drive by any means and not heavy at all. I tried a "super single" clutch on my friend's 997.2 Turbo 6MT and that was absolutely horrid. It runs an electrohydraulic power steering pump for the clutch power boost so there's zero feedback in the clutch pedal and there was a horrific clutch shudder well after break-in due to the lack of marcel springs or hub springs in the friction disk. It felt like the slip zone was the thickness of a single toe twitch as well so it was almost impossible to avoid stalling it unless you gave it a ton of revs and just dumped the clutch instead of trying to be smooth with it. I was terrified of pulling out in front of traffic. I have also tried some kind of "super single" on an EK9 and that makes this twin plate Coppermix look like a stock clutch. Releasing the clutch pedal even slightly too quickly feels like you're getting rear-ended. The pedal is extremely heavy as well and there's no vacuum assist like the GTR.
    • Yeah, well I was probably way underguessing the $300 figure anyway. Just multiplied a "normal" by 4 for the purposes of pointing out it's not cheap, particularly if it has to be repeated.
×
×
  • Create New...