Hetyey: I read your earlier post in which you question whether there is a difference between a powerlifting squat and a regular squat in training effect other than the powerlifting squat allowing one to lift more weight (due to better leverages I assume). I have to disagree with this comment based on my limited knowledge of body mechanics and more importantly, personal experience. I believe that a PL squat will allow one to lift more weight if the glute-hamstrings-lower back are strong enough, but not otherwise. Some time ago I discovered that my slightly below parallel PL squat was actually WEAKER than my rock bottom BB squat. The reason being that my hammies and hips were (relatively) pathetic. As I continued to use a PL squat, and concentrated on extra glute/ham work, my PL squat increased and became stronger than my high bar BB squat. Moreover, I can feel my hammies working much harder when I PL squat a few inches below parallel than when I OL squat (even when taken to rock bottom). It is more than just having better leverage (low bar squatting and wide stance), certain muscles are being used to a much greater extent. In my experience, a squat is not a squat. Variations matter based on the training effect you are after. A front squat will stress the quads more than a back squat. A high-bar close-stance back squat stresses the quads relatively more than a low bar PL squat. As you rightly note, a deadlift is essentially a squat with the weight held in front of body instead of on the shoulders. Yet (as I am sure you have noticed) the DL places relatively more stress on the hip extensors than a conventional BB squat. The point is – different forms stress different muscles.
Another illustration: the bench press. I used to be an elbow at 90 deg. bencher. I was much stronger benching in this manner than when my elbows were pointed towards my feet. The reason being that my triceps were relatively weak. By benching at 90 deg. I was masking my weakness. When I changed my benching style, my weights went down temporarily. I could feel the new benching style in my tris more than I had at the 90 deg. style. When my tricep strength improved, my bench greatly surpassed my previous bench strength. You asked in one of your posts whether or not everyone’s goal was to get stronger and thus to put on muscle (or words to that effect). The short answer is “no.” Speaking only for myself, increased muscle mass is a secondary goal for me at best. Yes, I would like to add about 20 lbs of muscle (about 10 of those lbs need to be regained from a lengthy training layoff), but my main goal is strength, not mass. My plan is to compete at PL’ing at 181 lbs (I currently weigh 160.5 #) and attempt to achieve a > 2x BW bench (i.e., about 385) and a 3x BW squat (i.e., about 545). I want to eventually run a sub 5 sec 40 yard dash. I also wish to eventually learn and compete at Olympic Lifting (right now my only goal is to eventually perform a BW snatch). While diet certainly will play a role in my eventual success at achieving these goals (and I have no doubt that I will achieve all of the foregoing), my method(s) of training will certainly be the most important factor. I must strive to increase my neural efficiency with regular low rep training. I will need to perfect my form in the competition lifts and in sprinting form. I will need to improve my limit stength, reversal strength, starting strength, explosive strength and acceleration strength. I will need to work on my mini-max for each of the three lifts PL lifts. I will need to improve my speed, speed-strength and strength-speed. I will need to identify the muscles which are holding my lifts back and make them stronger. I will need to do any number of things that are not encompassed in a generic program – ANY generic program, whether HIT or GVT. These are my goals. They may not be yours, they may not be anybody else’s on this board or on this planet (although I am sure there are a few kindred spirits here). I hope that you reach your goals (and surpass them) whatever they may be. However, I strongly disagree with any implication that the method you go about achieving your goals is the best way, most efficient way, or an equally good way for me to achieve my goals. This is not to say that I cannot learn from or apply the methods that you use to my training – certainly I can (indeed, I plan to use HIT-based methods for 8 weeks out of the next 34 weeks of my periodization plan). But I also plan to use elements from Louie Simmons’ WSB method, the Korte 3x3 plan, the Chris Thibideau (sp?) APRE cybernetic periodisation plan, modified German volume training, Poliquin’s 2-day workouts, the traditional pyramid progression plan, the Husker Power plan and Jay Schroeder’s evo-sport training methods and many other influences over the next 3 years.
If you are interested, my short-run plan over the next 34 weeks is something like this (subject to change based on the rate at which these programs bring me closer to my goals): (1) 4 weeks on a WSB program; (2) 2 weeks of a 2-a-day workouts; (3) 2 weeks of HIT; (4) 2 weeks of 2-a-days; (5) 2 weeks of HIT-based program; (6) 4 weeks of WSB program; (7) 3 weeks of GVT; (8) 2 weeks of HIT; (9) 3 weeks of GVT; (10) 2 weeks of HIT; and (11) 8 weeks of WSB. The thing that all of my programs will have in common (other than hard work and dedication on my part) is that is that they will all focus primarily on variations of basic pushing, pulling and squat movements (the variations will be based on my perceived needs at the time) with the addition of assistance exercises for identified weak points. At various times I will lift light weights very quickly, at other times heavy weights more slowly, sometimes I will use slow negatives (however, at all times I will lift as explosively as possible using compensatory acceleration), other times I will use very fast negatives, sometimes I will use accomdating resistance (i.e., bands and chains), sometimes I will use contrast methods (weight releasers, and other post-tetonic potentiation methods such as the 1-6 method, among others), I will occasionally use static training and functional isometrics, at various times I will have long rests between sets, at various times short rests between sets, sometimes I will push to failure, other times I will leave a little in the tank, sometimes I will use high volume (up to 36 sets per day 5 days per week), other times I will use very low volume (10 sets per day -- training 2x per week).
The point is, my plan is based on my goals and needs, not yours. I know I will succeed in my goals because I am not locked into my general framework and I will tailor my plan to fit my needs. I am also confident in my eventual success because I am not locked into a particular training dogma. Based on my training experiences and training knowledge (which I dare say is fairly large compared with your average gym rat, personal trainer and even compares favorably, I dare say, with some strength and conditioning coaches), I do not accept that one size fits all when it comes to the training of an athlete.
If I have misinterpreted any of your comments, I appologize. I am sure you will correct me. I await your response.
Sincerely,
Matthew A. Levy