-
Join the Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum The Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum is dedicated to no nonsense muscle and strength building. If you need advice that works, you have come to the right place. This forum focuses on building strength and muscle using the basics. You will also find that the Ausbb- Australian Bodybuilding Forum stresses encouragement and respect. Trolls and name calling are not allowed here. No matter what your personal goals are, you will be given effective advice that produces results.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.
Sheiko
Bench Polkov
SIR BENCHALOT
It is not ideal but it is doable and is how I perform all my workouts. You will have still performed all the necessary sets in the previous warm-up. SP has written his own versions of programs using this method as well. Doing bench in between squats would mainly be for the purpose of allowing your legs time to rest so that the following sets would be able to be performed with appropriate speed and form.
PTCCanberra
New member
I'm two days from from finishing my first 37. I've then got a week of training, go away for a week then have 6 weeks of training before the meet. How would everyone suggest I schedule it? I was planning 37,32 but I'll obviously have to take a week out to accommodate going away. Which week should it be?
PTC Canberra
0437011088
http://www.ptccanberra.com.au
PTC Canberra
0437011088
http://www.ptccanberra.com.au
Bench Polkov
SIR BENCHALOT
Discard the last session of week 2 and the first two sessions of week 3.
Last edited:
0ni
Registered Rustler
If you focus on increasing volume over time, it's hard to go wrong
Is it optimal? Who knows. There was a reason why it was done though
PTCCanberra
New member
Bench Polkov
SIR BENCHALOT
Sorry of 32
jzpowahz
Well-known member
which program are you on? Have you recently tested 1rm? Actual or inflated max?
First try ran 37 - 32
Next try ran the 13 week Dave bates modification. Improved on bench both times, lost strength on deads both times. Ran actual maxes.
0ni
Registered Rustler
"The first stage is the powerlifer's accommodation to the growing
volume and intensity of the loading. A yearly rise in both with
contribute to the powerlifter's improvement and last an average of 6
years. The second stage is defined by a *relatively* stable yearly
volume but a yearly increase in intensity. A direct correlation exists
between intensity and one's total but while such a correlation between
volume and total is not supported."
The recommendations for
volume are as follows. Novices = 700, class 3 = 900, class 2-1 = 1K,
CMS = 1.1k, MS = 1.25k, MSIC = 1.7k. This is total number of reps done
with the bar over 49%
volume and intensity of the loading. A yearly rise in both with
contribute to the powerlifter's improvement and last an average of 6
years. The second stage is defined by a *relatively* stable yearly
volume but a yearly increase in intensity. A direct correlation exists
between intensity and one's total but while such a correlation between
volume and total is not supported."
The recommendations for
volume are as follows. Novices = 700, class 3 = 900, class 2-1 = 1K,
CMS = 1.1k, MS = 1.25k, MSIC = 1.7k. This is total number of reps done
with the bar over 49%
jzpowahz
Well-known member
Don't know if this has been mentioned but Dave Bates 13 week equipped for beginner program.
http://pdf.erictalmant.com/13 wk beginner program _equipment_.pdf
Details in forum 13 weeks (with equipment) | Sheiko Training Forums (sponsored by BMF Sports) Still reading and can't wait to see how SP went with this experimental program. Blast from the past
Also, 13 week beginner programmer raw is here Sheiko 13 Week Workout
http://pdf.erictalmant.com/13 wk beginner program _equipment_.pdf
Details in forum 13 weeks (with equipment) | Sheiko Training Forums (sponsored by BMF Sports) Still reading and can't wait to see how SP went with this experimental program. Blast from the past
Also, 13 week beginner programmer raw is here Sheiko 13 Week Workout
Last edited:
Spritcha
New member
With the DB templates- they were ok- but not as good as the original 37+37+32.
for me personally- the prep programs I developed are the best I have ever done- but thay may simply be because I individualised them for my own needs. I ran prep 3 into the raw worlds in russia and my lifts have never felt better. I didn't know what to expect but by the time I hit my final squat warm-up 297.5kg and it came up like an empty bar I knew I had nailed the peak. Unfortunately I strained by back- so I couldnt deadlift- but squat was 335kg and felt pretty easy, bench was 222.5kg and felt good. The plan was to open deadlift on 300 and go straight to 320 for the second- but alas- it was not to be.
I have learnt more since then, so I am working on some new templates for a couple of lifters.
for me personally- the prep programs I developed are the best I have ever done- but thay may simply be because I individualised them for my own needs. I ran prep 3 into the raw worlds in russia and my lifts have never felt better. I didn't know what to expect but by the time I hit my final squat warm-up 297.5kg and it came up like an empty bar I knew I had nailed the peak. Unfortunately I strained by back- so I couldnt deadlift- but squat was 335kg and felt pretty easy, bench was 222.5kg and felt good. The plan was to open deadlift on 300 and go straight to 320 for the second- but alas- it was not to be.
I have learnt more since then, so I am working on some new templates for a couple of lifters.
PTCCanberra
New member
If a lifter has never trained in a sheiko like fashion how/what would you do to prep them for it in terms of programming?
PTC Canberra
0437011088
http://www.ptccanberra.com.au
PTC Canberra
0437011088
http://www.ptccanberra.com.au
0ni
Registered Rustler
3 day a week training, low side of volume
Then just add volume as they can deal with it. Eventually the training sessions take too long obviously, so you add more training sessions and spread the volume out
There are rough guidelines that I posted above, but this is the long and short of it. There are also individual rep and RPE prescriptions, but this is very individual. If the lifter is a good grinder and bar velocity stays static, they will generally do better with fewer reps per set and a lower RPE. If they are the opposite like me and start fast then die, they will generally need the opposite- more reps per set and a higher RPE
Then just add volume as they can deal with it. Eventually the training sessions take too long obviously, so you add more training sessions and spread the volume out
There are rough guidelines that I posted above, but this is the long and short of it. There are also individual rep and RPE prescriptions, but this is very individual. If the lifter is a good grinder and bar velocity stays static, they will generally do better with fewer reps per set and a lower RPE. If they are the opposite like me and start fast then die, they will generally need the opposite- more reps per set and a higher RPE
Bench Polkov
SIR BENCHALOT
I believe its because the Russians just focus on the comp lift. You wear a belt for comps so you always train with a belt. And on a sheiko volume level routine you will hardly be left with a weak core, you'll be bracing it against your belt all the time!
0ni
Registered Rustler
Wearing a belt make zero difference to your "core"
Wearing it your midsection will strengthen
Don't wear it, your midsection will strengthen and equal amount
http://www.setantacollege.com/wp-co...muliple repetitions of the squat exercise.pdf
What they found:
1. The “sticking point” became much more pronounced without a belt. Although there weren’t huge differences between total time it took to complete the eccentric and concentric portions of the lift with or without a belt, the period of the concentric with the knee angle between 90 and 135 degrees increased throughout the sets both with and without a belt, but increased significantly more without a belt. Of course, this is to be expected since the load used was the beltless 8rm, so it would be relatively less difficult with a belt than without.
2. There were no significant differences between belted and beltless with regard to kinematic and force plate data. HOWEVER, in both groups, the amount of forward lean increased across the sets, from a minimum of about 51 degrees to a maximum of about 46 degrees.
3. Intraabdominal pressure was 25-40% higher in the belted group, as opposed to the beltless group.
4. EMG data was taken for the vastus lateralis (a quadriceps muscle), biceps femoris (a hamstrings muscle), external oblique, and spinal erectors.
a) no significant differences were observed for the spinal erectors in the belt vs. beltless set, and muscle activation in the eccentric and concentric phases was actually quite similar, indicating that it takes about the same amount of effort from the spinal erectors to keep the spine extended during both phases of the lift.
b) no significant differences were observed for external oblique activation either. The EO is one of the muscle used to compress the abdomen along with the internal oblique, rectus abdominis and transversus abdominis. Proponents of beltless training often argue that these muscles will contract harder without a belt to product the necessary intraabdominal pressure. Such was not the case in this study. However, they did observe about twice as much EO activity in the concentric as the eccentric, regardless of belt usage.
c) the vastus lateralis showed significantly more activity during the concentric portion with a belt than without across most time points, and especially during the sticking point of the lift. This increased activation of the knee extensors may help explain the smaller increase in time spent at the sticking point with a belt than without. Both with and without a belt, the VL showed about 50% higher activation during the concentric than the eccentric portion of the lift.
d) the biceps femoris showed about twice as much activity during the concentric portion of the lift than the eccentric both with and without a belt. The biggest difference seen with vs. without a belt was that the increase in BF activation during the concentric portion of the lift increased more across the set with the belt than without. Initially the values were about the same, but activation only increased 31.5% across the set without a belt, vs. 42.5% with a belt.
Implications:
1. In spite of the set with a belt being easier (since both sets were performed with the beltless 8rm), it still resulted in greater quad and hamstring activation, especially during the sticking point and as the set progressed, respectively.
2. Wearing a belt seems to increase intraabdominal pressure (which should reduce net shear stress on the spine) without diminishing abdominal activation, at least if we assume that external oblique activation is representative of the rest of the muscles of the abdominal wall.
3. Increased forward lean is an undesirable effect of fatigue. The researchers found that the subjects experienced more and more forward lean as their sets progressed. In their discussion at the end of the article, the referenced another article (here) saying that the more proficient someone was at the squat, the more upright they stayed and the more they relied on knee extension rather than hip extension. I’m working on rounding up full-text for it too to check out the study procedure. It looks really interesting, so if I can find it, I’ll do a write-up for it too.
4. It seems like abdominal weakness may have more to do with the back rounding at the bottom of a squat than spinal erector weakness. Spinal erector activation was about the same for both phases of the squat, which means that if weak erectors caused the back to round over, the rounding should be expected to start from the moment you unrack the bar. Conversely, external oblique activation was about twice as high for the concentric as the eccentric, indicating an increased challenge to that muscle (and potentially the muscles of the abdominal wall in general).
5. There is a bigger difference in eccentric vs. concentric muscle activity for the biceps femoris (hamstring muscle) than the vastus lateralis (quad muscle). It’s hard to draw definitive conclusions from this factoid, but it could mean a couple things. It could mean that people tend to excessively load the knees relative to the hips in lowering a squat. It could also mean that loading the knees to lower a squat is the more natural pattern (i.e. the olympic style squat vs. the “butt back” powerlifting style squat). No definitive guidelines can be drawn from this one study, but it’s worth keeping in the back of your mind.
Based on the variables assessed in this study, it seems like one could use it to argue for training with a belt. Wearing a belt allows you to lift more weight, and even with the same training weights it increases muscle activation in the quads and hamstrings without decreasing abdominal activation. An argument for beltless training either needs counter evidence or a rationale based on other variables.
Wearing it your midsection will strengthen
Don't wear it, your midsection will strengthen and equal amount
http://www.setantacollege.com/wp-co...muliple repetitions of the squat exercise.pdf
What they found:
1. The “sticking point” became much more pronounced without a belt. Although there weren’t huge differences between total time it took to complete the eccentric and concentric portions of the lift with or without a belt, the period of the concentric with the knee angle between 90 and 135 degrees increased throughout the sets both with and without a belt, but increased significantly more without a belt. Of course, this is to be expected since the load used was the beltless 8rm, so it would be relatively less difficult with a belt than without.
2. There were no significant differences between belted and beltless with regard to kinematic and force plate data. HOWEVER, in both groups, the amount of forward lean increased across the sets, from a minimum of about 51 degrees to a maximum of about 46 degrees.
3. Intraabdominal pressure was 25-40% higher in the belted group, as opposed to the beltless group.
4. EMG data was taken for the vastus lateralis (a quadriceps muscle), biceps femoris (a hamstrings muscle), external oblique, and spinal erectors.
a) no significant differences were observed for the spinal erectors in the belt vs. beltless set, and muscle activation in the eccentric and concentric phases was actually quite similar, indicating that it takes about the same amount of effort from the spinal erectors to keep the spine extended during both phases of the lift.
b) no significant differences were observed for external oblique activation either. The EO is one of the muscle used to compress the abdomen along with the internal oblique, rectus abdominis and transversus abdominis. Proponents of beltless training often argue that these muscles will contract harder without a belt to product the necessary intraabdominal pressure. Such was not the case in this study. However, they did observe about twice as much EO activity in the concentric as the eccentric, regardless of belt usage.
c) the vastus lateralis showed significantly more activity during the concentric portion with a belt than without across most time points, and especially during the sticking point of the lift. This increased activation of the knee extensors may help explain the smaller increase in time spent at the sticking point with a belt than without. Both with and without a belt, the VL showed about 50% higher activation during the concentric than the eccentric portion of the lift.
d) the biceps femoris showed about twice as much activity during the concentric portion of the lift than the eccentric both with and without a belt. The biggest difference seen with vs. without a belt was that the increase in BF activation during the concentric portion of the lift increased more across the set with the belt than without. Initially the values were about the same, but activation only increased 31.5% across the set without a belt, vs. 42.5% with a belt.
Implications:
1. In spite of the set with a belt being easier (since both sets were performed with the beltless 8rm), it still resulted in greater quad and hamstring activation, especially during the sticking point and as the set progressed, respectively.
2. Wearing a belt seems to increase intraabdominal pressure (which should reduce net shear stress on the spine) without diminishing abdominal activation, at least if we assume that external oblique activation is representative of the rest of the muscles of the abdominal wall.
3. Increased forward lean is an undesirable effect of fatigue. The researchers found that the subjects experienced more and more forward lean as their sets progressed. In their discussion at the end of the article, the referenced another article (here) saying that the more proficient someone was at the squat, the more upright they stayed and the more they relied on knee extension rather than hip extension. I’m working on rounding up full-text for it too to check out the study procedure. It looks really interesting, so if I can find it, I’ll do a write-up for it too.
4. It seems like abdominal weakness may have more to do with the back rounding at the bottom of a squat than spinal erector weakness. Spinal erector activation was about the same for both phases of the squat, which means that if weak erectors caused the back to round over, the rounding should be expected to start from the moment you unrack the bar. Conversely, external oblique activation was about twice as high for the concentric as the eccentric, indicating an increased challenge to that muscle (and potentially the muscles of the abdominal wall in general).
5. There is a bigger difference in eccentric vs. concentric muscle activity for the biceps femoris (hamstring muscle) than the vastus lateralis (quad muscle). It’s hard to draw definitive conclusions from this factoid, but it could mean a couple things. It could mean that people tend to excessively load the knees relative to the hips in lowering a squat. It could also mean that loading the knees to lower a squat is the more natural pattern (i.e. the olympic style squat vs. the “butt back” powerlifting style squat). No definitive guidelines can be drawn from this one study, but it’s worth keeping in the back of your mind.
Based on the variables assessed in this study, it seems like one could use it to argue for training with a belt. Wearing a belt allows you to lift more weight, and even with the same training weights it increases muscle activation in the quads and hamstrings without decreasing abdominal activation. An argument for beltless training either needs counter evidence or a rationale based on other variables.