Ed Coan interview, periodisation.

[jj80]

I posted this somewhere else and it got some pretty good discussion going on periodisation vs other training schemes so I thought I'd repost it here. Bazza gave me the link to the video initially. It's an interview with Ed Coan and Marty Gallagher.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPADDBiY1qw]Starting Strength Series : Ed Coan - YouTube[/ame]

They talk about straight line periodization being the secret to his success, along with his precise planning (of periodization workouts). They also emphasise the benefits of sets of 5s. A few random quotes (some may be slightly bastardized):

On planning (Coan never missed a pre-planned lift in a periodization program):
"make every single lift, when you're planning put down lifts you know you will make"
"know how to pick your numbers and your body positioning at all times through the lift" (and you'll make all your lifts)
"when planning, practise ego-less planning, have a cold realistic sense of your capacities"

The sets he used were, 10s 8s 5s 3s 1s, high volume to high intensity. Ed also set up all his assistance exercises this way. Sometimes after a cycle, he would not go back to high reps immediately, it would burn him out - he would go back to 5s.

On sets of 5:
He trained with Doug Furnas, who believed 'the best strength gains you could get were from sets of 5'. Marty agreed 'we thought 5 was the best combination between' (doesn't finish sentence, I'm guessing hypertrophy and strength). They added 'thats what we got kirk on' (Karwoski).
Coan said 'youre not going to develop the same strength cause youre not doing the same work' comparing olympic weightlifting singles to sets of 5.
Marty says 'john mcallum stressed it in his keys to strength. kassidy stressed it to us'. Rippetoe notes Mark Berry and Bill Star also emphasised sets of 5s.

I'm just about to start reading Dave Tate's "Periodization Bible". I'm aware he has objections to Coan type periodization programs, but I wonder if Westside is really as appropriate for the intermediate or novice. I'm doing a bit of a rough periodization program I wrote up myself at the moment, hoping to hit a 130kg bench in a month or so.

 

[Chisholm]

Playing devil's advocate here, but is it entirely possible that Ed Coan achieved such immense success despite using linear periodisation? Not trying to suggest he didn't work his arse off, bit who's to say he mightn't have done even better on other methods of programming?

For example, looking at his build, it seems he has freaky proportions/leverages for powerlifting - short, yet very broad shoulder and hips, massive hands etc.

Seems Marty loves talking over Ed, who doesn't across as particularly articulate, nor have a great deal to say.

 

[jj80]

He doubtlessly had genetic advantages, but he probably achieved as much as he could with what he had (or close to), which was why he was so far ahead.

He also failed multiple drug tests. But from what I've seen, and I continue to see evidence of it, periodisation programs dominate in successful strength training gyms.

 

[0ni]

I'm getting increasingly fond of the idea that the ideal program is the one that you believe the most in.
Also more people get strong on linear progression style training and accumulation/realisation than Westside stuff.

Speaking personally and obvious limited experience here but I've been killing my singles since dropping DE type workouts in favour of lifting my warm-ups as fast as fucking possible. On my squats I actually try to launch the bar off my shoulders on every single rep and I get air up until about 80% of my max. For deadlift I like to add bands or chains and ramp up to a max really focusing again on launching my shit up and off the ground. Can't do this on bench unfortunately though. I guess I could add chains but long paused reps seem to be doing a pretty good job of getting me explosive starts

That's a bit of a side track but I don't think the assertion that you can't work ME/DE/RE on linear progression or block progression systems totally false. In fact I would go as far as to say that I lack the ability to grind more than anything else and need to do more reps, something that Westside can neglect.

 

[RyanF]

I remember you posting this video a few weeks back, watching it. When they talked Occam's razor programming, I think the discussion got a little botchy. I'm not watching the video again or trying to find the exact statements, but I think it was Marty who said something to the effect of: "Why train for 2 hours a day, 6 days a week, when you could train for 50 minutes a day, 4 days a week, and get just as strong?" The rhetorical point sounds like it's case closed, but it really isn't. There are legitimate reasons to train more frequently and/or for more time, and the total time in the gym is not the only consideration when applying Occam's razor. But I digress.

If I were to finish the sentence on what sets of 5 are the best combination between, I'd probably say volume/workload and intensity, rather than hypertrophy and strength. It lets you accumulate a relatively high number of reps at a weight that is relatively close to your 1RM. Higher rep sets don't get you as close to your 1RM so that adaptation is less specific to powerlifting, and lower reps (for the same number of sets) don't accumulate as much workload, practice or stimulus.

The periodisation plan that I learned from Chris Seville back in 2010 is very similar to Ed Coan's 12 week cycle. IIRC, the plan Chris showed us went a bit easier on the assistance training, but typically had an extra set on each of the main lifts, and I think the light days were the same volume as the heavy days, but at 50% of the weight used on the heavy day of the same week.

 

[Chisholm]

I'm getting increasingly fond of the idea that the ideal program is the one that you believe the most in.
Also more people get strong on linear progression style training and accumulation/realisation than Westside stuff.

Speaking personally and obvious limited experience here but I've been killing my singles since dropping DE type workouts in favour of lifting my warm-ups as fast as fucking possible

I strongly agree with this, this is what I did when doing something similar to the Bulgarian Method, and more recently on 531 I do speed work as my warm up for every session. For example Squat 531 day looks something like:

Olympic Squat
bar x 5
60 x 3
70 x 3
80 x 3
90 x 3
working sets:
100 x 5
110 x 5
120 x 5

*whatever assistance/accessories*

IMO warmups should be ramped up with not too many reps, done as explosively as possible, and technique dialled in. Working on having good speed and technique is probably even more important for those like us that are not strong in the ability to grind out slow heavy lifts or recover from bad positions.

 

[The Hamburgler]

@ OP.

If you trawl through YouTube and US strength forums enough you can find plenty of examples of complete novices accomplishing a lot using Westside methods from the start.
It should be noted though, that all the ones I have come across are coached by fairly well know athletes/coaches eg AJ Robers, Shane Sweatt, Laura Phelps, Chuck Vogelpohl

 

[0ni]

IIRC the novices at Westside do a 5RM for their ME work and shitloads of volume on the DE work. Like 20+ sets of 2-3 reps

 

[The Hamburgler]

Sweatt/Phelps will only do 1RM's on ME (good mornings aside).

A lot of the other guys seem to prescribe what is basically 2 x dynamic effort days per week just to dial in technique for the first 6-12 months

 

[0ni]

Sweatt/Phelps will only do 1RM's on ME (good mornings aside).

A lot of the other guys seem to prescribe what is basically 2 x dynamic effort days per week just to dial in technique for the first 6-12 months

Is that now though, don't forget she is very strong. Did her training always look like this?

 

[The Hamburgler]

I meant that is what the 2 of those coach.

Here is the PLUSA article Shane Wrote
Powerlifting USA Magazine | Westside Training - April 2012

direct quote is "Also, many times you will hear people say to have beginners do 3–5 reps, not singles, for safety. This does not work, as the majority of injuries come from repetition, not singles. During reps small muscle groups fatigue faster than large muscle groups increasing their injury rate. This is one reason why people tear small muscle groups in their shoulders instead of big muscle groups like their lats while benching. It is also easier to teach people form one rep at a time; it is less confusing to them. "

 

[0ni]

Man both sides of that argument are pretty retarded in my eyes
You do reps because reps build a lift and as a beginner you will most likely have a fucked up force curve that needs flattening