My buddy Dave sent me a few programs that UCLA uses:
"I saw the guys on your blog mentioning 5/3/1 and how it wasn't working. I thought i might pass along the past three 5/3/1 training splits we've done. These are based on the 20+ years of training logs from my coach in Seattle (Todd Christensen), and have worked really well for the guys here. There were a bunch of variations for different individuals, but the core lifts were the same."
You can find them here:
First
Second
Third
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Thanks a bunch Nate. Quick question- are the percentages based of your true 1RM, or is it 90%? Also, I couldn't see the third program.
ReplyDeleteNot to diminish Dave's routines at all, actually Paul Carter just posted a similar variation on 5/3/1 that he is implementing for himself, but no one here has been on 5/3/1 long enough to say that it doesn't work. (Exception being Justin.) No one has stalled, no one has any real tangible evidence from their own training to pass judgment on it, other than general criticisms posted for discussions sake.
ReplyDeleteJumping on one of these routines simply because it gets better overall reviews from the powers that be on this blog is just admitting that you wasted the last cycle or more of 5/3/1.
Long story short, you simply can't say that it doesn't work because you haven't been on it long enough.
@JC: http://people.csail.mit.edu/beckmann/misc/pl/Sep-20-split.pdf
ReplyDeleteTypo in the original, this link should work.
-- Sorry for asking dumb questions, but: how are these programs related to 531? Obviously, there are lots of similarities, but I won't call these programs variants of 531.
ReplyDelete-- Also, who mentioned that 531 wasn't working? Shanker? JC? At least on my end, I claimed that 531 (followed to the letter) is, in my opinion, not a good choice for advanced lifters, at least not on a long-term basis. Remark: I don't know of any advanced lifters at MIT. I consider Frank, myself (not at MIT), and maybe Sheng, on the border between intermediate and advanced.
Danny:
ReplyDeleteI think it was just general negative consensus and JC saying he wanted to change. Like I've said numerous times, no one here has been on it long enough to say it doesn't work.
Sorry to jump on this post so late, but I just wanted to clarify a few things
ReplyDelete@Jancarlo: 100% is your max that day. Normally we use your 1RM but we also adjust this up or down based on how we're feeling. I have people use the MikeT's RPS as a way of estimating this. The most important part is that your work sets feel like work, but not a max amount of work. Going down during a set sequence is fine if the % seems too high.
@sraman09: I'm not familiar with Paul Carter's routine, but I know this sort of template goes back a long way. I'm not claiming to have invented it at all. Most of it is based on the template I learned from Todd Christensen and from watching what worked for his elite master's lifters, and then watching what worked for UCLA's collegiate lifters. I was probably speaking too loose in saying that 5/3/1 wasn't working, but I saw JC's earlier post about it and thought I might offer what we've seen work as effective training splits on it.
@Danny: There are a lot of "5/3/1" variations. This one is based on a three-week wave with work sets of 5, 3 or 1. Wendler's version, which I think a lot of people use, has people working up to a projected RM for one of these and then doing more reps if they can. This version is based on doing multiple worksets of the target rep amount, but always stopping at the rep. In this version, the big emphasis is on getting multiple heavy work sets in so you can actually feel what it's like to grind out a 5th rep or a 3rd rep, etc. In my opinion Wendler's program misses this effect as one work set may not be enough to get the desired work effect.
I hope this helps and feel free to email me if you have any questions. There were a lot of variations for individual people to tweak it, so it was definitely not a one-size-fits-all program.