OLAD may not be right for everyone.
I happened to like it so much when I did it in the fall that I started it again this week.
Stop calling it a newbie routine because it is not for newbies.
[quote]Feanor76 wrote:
These are three legitimate concerns. As far as exercise selection, the “original” OLAD (pre-T-Nation) was:
Monday: Snatch
Tuesday: Front Squat
Wednesday: Clean
Thursday: Jerk
Saturday: Light total… (i.e. Sn and Cl + J)
this is very different than the OLAD i saw on this site, which recommended dedicating an entire workout to only military press. the exercises listed here and very complex, and give a mugh wider range of muscle stimulation that simply doing incline bench for an entire workout. also, all of those exercises you mentioned there are connected. so is the OLAD template you just listed good for an athlete interested in making strength gains in the OLY lifts? maybe. but probably still not enough frequency for an advanced OLY lifter.
So, maybe yes, this is a Oly lifter’s specialization. And if you had three presses and two leg days, it would be a pressing specialization. Nothing wrong with that, right?
nothing wrong with that… if what you want is to specialize on presses. but i don’t know anyone who would want to do just for the sake of specializing in pressing. seems kinda pointless to me.
As far as distribution of load: yes, it is concentrated in one workout (for a lift … there would be distribution for muscles if you did say dips and military presses … tris get worked two different days; do that “Olympic” specialization and you’ll get P-chain and shoulders on most days). But, this concentration also allows A LOT of recovery time. Good for athletes (esp. in season) and good for older folks.
it is still very limited… for most people in the gym who are concerned about chinning as much as they are about benching, and about having biceps and triceps as great as there calves, OLAD is garbage. it is not enough volume nor is it enough variety nor is it enough frequency to give an even intermediate lifter decent hypertrophy or strength gains.
if an athlete wants strength gains with OLAD, he must either choose very few types of motions to get strong at, or have all of the exercises connected <i.e. the OLY OLAD template you laid out>.
[b]Is OLAD different? Yup. Is it different just to get attention? Well, there’s nothing for sale … so maybe Dan tried it (and he IS an advanced lifter, regardless of anything else … his brains, his coaching ability, his sports, his humor … Dan John --IS-- a VERY advanced strength athlete … and has been for many years) and found it successful and useful. Later, he was able to turn it into an article for T-Nation.
One other point, is that OLAD is meant to be used in conjunction with “play” (sports) … organized or otherwise … you’re supposed to be doing something else, also.
Regards,
Mark[/quote][/b]
thanks for actually taking time to read my posts and not just flame me for calling it a noob program.
but i think i’ve made my points as clearly as i could.
later.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
OLAD may not be right for everyone.
I happened to like it so much when I did it in the fall that I started it again this week.
Stop calling it a newbie routine because it is not for newbies.[/quote]
if you’re getting good size and strength gains from OLAD you are a noob who cannot handle real volume.
[quote]conorh wrote:
To me, this whole thread is pointless, because the OP will not try OLAD and is not receptive to any reasoning as to why he should.
All you can do is agree to disagree.[/quote]
again, the useless 'don’t knock it ‘til you try it’ position.
another logical fallacy.
must i try bowflex before i realize you’ll never get serious results from that machine? no. must i try a men’s health ‘ab’ program before i realize it’s useless? no.
[quote]hueyOT wrote:
if we’re looking at OLAD from a performance perspective, why would you ever put yourself in a big caloric defecit? it makes no sense to be in a caloric defecit if you are trying to improve performance.
except maybe, if you’re fat and out of shape. but if you’re in even decent shape, performance will get worse if you deny yourself the calories you need.
i have no idea what you’re talking about, unless you’re trying to recommend OLAD as a program for dieting bodybuilders. even then, if the bodybuilder was advanced, it’s still too little volume and not enough frequency.
[/quote]
We are on totally different pages of this book. I’m not talking about elite performance athletes and/or bodybuilders. I’m talking about a regular guy with a job and family who needs to lose a few pounds and needs a weight-training program to maintain strength and LBM. A guy such as myself. Perhaps in your nice santized academic world of kinesiology classes you only deal with elite athletes and bodybuilders. In the real world, you deal with fat schmoes like myself who can’t do presses 5-6 times per week. Welcome to the real world.
PS - Before you accuse me of hating people with education, note that I have two grad degrees. I value education. But I also value experience and real-world results.
[quote]hueyOT wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
OLAD may not be right for everyone.
I happened to like it so much when I did it in the fall that I started it again this week.
Stop calling it a newbie routine because it is not for newbies.
if you’re getting good size and strength gains from OLAD you are a noob who cannot handle real volume.[/quote]
what is your obsession with calling people newbies who do OLAD? Just as it is with everything people’s bodies respond differently to different types of programs. Some people prefer full body, maybe an upper/lower split. . .etc, etc.
Have you tried any of the premade routines on here? Are any of them suitable to your such high standards? Just curious
Matt
Huey-
Just to play devil’s advocate, do you think that Mike Mentzer, Arthur Jones, and Dorian Yates are/were “noobs”?
I am not saying I agree or disagree with “HD” or “HIT”. But from a pure experience equates to volume standpoint, your theory is shot to shit.
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
hueyOT wrote:
if we’re looking at OLAD from a performance perspective, why would you ever put yourself in a big caloric defecit? it makes no sense to be in a caloric defecit if you are trying to improve performance.
except maybe, if you’re fat and out of shape. but if you’re in even decent shape, performance will get worse if you deny yourself the calories you need.
i have no idea what you’re talking about, unless you’re trying to recommend OLAD as a program for dieting bodybuilders. even then, if the bodybuilder was advanced, it’s still too little volume and not enough frequency.
We are on totally different pages of this book. I’m not talking about elite performance athletes and/or bodybuilders. I’m talking about a regular guy with a job and family who needs to lose a few pounds and needs a weight-training program to maintain strength and LBM. A guy such as myself. Perhaps in your nice santized academic world of kinesiology classes you only deal with elite athletes and bodybuilders. In the real world, you deal with fat schmoes like myself who can’t do presses 5-6 times per week. Welcome to the real world.
PS - Before you accuse me of hating people with education, note that I have two grad degrees. I value education. But I also value experience and real-world results.[/quote]
we are on different pages for sure. but i did say that this program would be good for noobs, so we are agreeing on that much. it’s a good program for most. but not for an advanced lifter.
[quote]slimsaw00 wrote:
hueyOT wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
OLAD may not be right for everyone.
I happened to like it so much when I did it in the fall that I started it again this week.
Stop calling it a newbie routine because it is not for newbies.
if you’re getting good size and strength gains from OLAD you are a noob who cannot handle real volume.
what is your obsession with calling people newbies who do OLAD? Just as it is with everything people’s bodies respond differently to different types of programs. Some people prefer full body, maybe an upper/lower split. . .etc, etc.
Have you tried any of the premade routines on here? Are any of them suitable to your such high standards? Just curious
Matt
[/quote]
i would never use someone else’s routine, i design all of my own programs. nobody knows my needs, abilities, and opportunities for development better than myself.
so no, i would never use a T-Nation program. however many of the principles that are always mentioned by some of the coaches are very true.
[quote]hueyOT wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
OLAD may not be right for everyone.
I happened to like it so much when I did it in the fall that I started it again this week.
Stop calling it a newbie routine because it is not for newbies.
if you’re getting good size and strength gains from OLAD you are a noob who cannot handle real volume.[/quote]
Please. I have been doing this for 18+ years. There is a time for high volume and a time for lower volume with heaviest weights.
I suspect you are doing high volume with lower weights based on your program description and you don’t even realize it.
[quote]hueyOT wrote:
conorh wrote:
To me, this whole thread is pointless, because the OP will not try OLAD and is not receptive to any reasoning as to why he should.
All you can do is agree to disagree.
again, the useless 'don’t knock it ‘til you try it’ position.
another logical fallacy.
must i try bowflex before i realize you’ll never get serious results from that machine? no. must i try a men’s health ‘ab’ program before i realize it’s useless? no.[/quote]
No. But the only people that recommend Bowflex are paid shills.
Well here is my take.
A wise man saud everything works, nothing works forever. Actually DJ had even said that every program works for 4-6 weeks or so.
The key to training is that thingy called periodization. So if someone has been doing a series of training blocks with high volume and high intensity they may need a more recovery oriented block to realize their gains from the previous block of training. The key to this recovery block would be a low volume (for recovery) and a higher intensity (avoid de training). So If I were going to implement OLAd for maximal progress in the long run that’s how I would do it.
As a side note I think OLAD and many of DJ’s programs are great because they allow for variety and life. Variety on OLAD? Yes. You can blend other stuff into the program (cardio/interval, med ball work, etc…) and get good results. In a pinch though you can eliminate the fluff and het to the heart of the matter and do the basics, get in get out get on with life.
I used OLAD on a few occasions with great results one being a very long work commute while working on buying a house. OLAD fit the bill. I know volume is great but sometimes life gets in the way. My life is hectic at times (isn;t everyones) and I need a “plan” that accomodates this. This is where I tend to fit in cycles of DJ’s work.
What would I do after, probably some higher volume bodybuilding training with higher reps to give the ol body a brreak from pounding the heavy iron, or you could go to a power oriented block with speed squats/ jump squats plyo’s oly’s etc to try to turn the strength gains into performance gains
Well there ya go
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
hueyOT wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
OLAD may not be right for everyone.
I happened to like it so much when I did it in the fall that I started it again this week.
Stop calling it a newbie routine because it is not for newbies.
if you’re getting good size and strength gains from OLAD you are a noob who cannot handle real volume.
Please. I have been doing this for 18+ years. There is a time for high volume and a time for lower volume with heaviest weights.
I suspect you are doing high volume with lower weights based on your program description and you don’t even realize it.[/quote]
No, no, no, haven’t you been paying attention? Huey says that if you get results from OLAD, then you are a noob. End of story. He knows all about us on this site. He knows all of our training levels, training histories, and which programs work best for us. He even knows that you may think you’re fairly advanced and experienced after your 18+ years, but when you say you like OLAD, that you are really lying to yourself, and are, in fact, a noob.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
hueyOT wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
OLAD may not be right for everyone.
I happened to like it so much when I did it in the fall that I started it again this week.
Stop calling it a newbie routine because it is not for newbies.
if you’re getting good size and strength gains from OLAD you are a noob who cannot handle real volume.
Please. I have been doing this for 18+ years. There is a time for high volume and a time for lower volume with heaviest weights.
I suspect you are doing high volume with lower weights based on your program description and you don’t even realize it.[/quote]
try again… high volume w/heavy weights. <more accurately, high volume for most… appropriate volume for me>.
[quote]beans wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
hueyOT wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
OLAD may not be right for everyone.
I happened to like it so much when I did it in the fall that I started it again this week.
Stop calling it a newbie routine because it is not for newbies.
if you’re getting good size and strength gains from OLAD you are a noob who cannot handle real volume.
Please. I have been doing this for 18+ years. There is a time for high volume and a time for lower volume with heaviest weights.
I suspect you are doing high volume with lower weights based on your program description and you don’t even realize it.
No, no, no, haven’t you been paying attention? Huey says that if you get results from OLAD, then you are a noob. End of story. He knows all about us on this site. He knows all of our training levels, training histories, and which programs work best for us. He even knows that you may think you’re fairly advanced and experienced after your 18+ years, but when you say you like OLAD, that you are really lying to yourself, and are, in fact, a noob.[/quote]
It seems that in Huey’s world, you’re either an elite athlete/bodybuilder or a noob. I am far from “elite.” Ergo, I am a noob. Oh well, let’s just all embrace our inner “noobness.” We have good company:
Chris Thibaudeau - A very successful Olympic lifter, strength coach, now bodybuilder. However, I don’t know if he has cracked the “elite” barrier yet (although he may have given his dedication and work ethic). Noob.
Chad Waterbury - Strong dude, successful strength coach, almost has a Ph.D. in physiology. But not an elite athlete. Noob.
Dan John - His accomplishments are numerous. But sorry, not elite. Noob.
Cressey/Robertson (because I have a feeling these guys are joined at the hip) - Just put out a great mobility DVD. These guys really know their stuff. They walk the walk too because both are powerlifters. I think Eric is working on an elite total but from what I recall he hasn’t made it yet. Sorry. Noob.
Charles Staley - You guessed it - noob.
[quote]hueyOT wrote:
frequency is a lot better for strength gains than NO frequency. and again, the amount of frequency you can handle depends on your level of conditioning.
[/quote]
One reason higher frequency is good for strength gains is because you are teaching your nervous system how to drive, coordinate, and call upon your muscles. Certainly, this is something novice lifters must do. It’s also something that should be done by advanced lifters when they want to achieve a peak performance.
I think that OLAD will not give you this neural grooving. I put this together to make the claim that OLAD can be used effectively by advanced lifters who do not need neural grooving (i.e. aren’t three weeks out from a contest).
Regards,
Mark
Huey, stop talking about logical fallacies. You’re committing them left and right as well.
The argument “don’t knock it till you try it” is NOT a logical fallacy insofar as the prescriber of program A has infinitely more credentials, supporters, experience, and results than the prescriber of program B. Bowlfex is a “B” program. OLAD is an “A” program.
If someone like Dan John says it’s a hard program, not designed for “noobs” (and for the love of God, stop using that word, please), I will give him the benefit of the doubt. I won’t believe him blindly. But I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt until I try the program. Bowlfex, on the other hand, and whoever the fuck made it, is not Dan John. Therefore, I can go ahead and say it’s a piece of shit without having to try it.
There are very few people here who are “elitists” as you call them, or whatever the hell you said about blindly following authorities. We are just giving a respected man (and few men are more respected than Dan John) the benefit of the doubt.
So please, either stop this nonsense and admit your fault, or go try OLAD and say whatever you want about it.
[quote]hueyOT wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
OLAD may not be right for everyone.
I happened to like it so much when I did it in the fall that I started it again this week.
Stop calling it a newbie routine because it is not for newbies.
if you’re getting good size and strength gains from OLAD you are a noob who cannot handle real volume.[/quote]
You keep saying that over and over, but you have yet to back it up with anything other than your own personal opinion of what an advanced lifter “requires” and “should do.” If you can’t come up with something more substantial than that, you’re wasting your time.
I don’t quite know what your hangup on volume is. There comes a point as you get stronger, that you simply cannot handle very much volume on a per session, per week or whatever basis. I didn’t have the forethought to save it, but there was a great Q and A post on EliteFTS from Jim Wendler, I think, about this. Some guy with a super high frequency bend wrote up some routine and Wendler made some comment about how it would be great for a small woman or child. Reason being, the stronger you get, the more volume and frequency have to slip in order to keep the product of frequency x volume x load/intensity. This remains true even with increases in work capacity, as it merely shifts the curve upward, if you follow me.
You can train with large loads frequently, but then the number of repetitions per session would have to go down. For instance, if I decided I wanted to pull 6 days a week, I would probably give myself a cap of 5 reps per session for the full lift and 10-15 for rep work off the rack. If I did more then that, I wouldn’t be able to pull heavy after a few days or so. Now, if I were a “noob” and I only pulled 225 or so, I would likely be able to get away with alot more volume.
That’s what I don’t understand about your position. You suggest an “advanced” trainer needs more volume, when in fact, the stronger or more advanced the trainer is, the less volume they likely “need”.
Further, OLAD is frewuent training, and it is a large volume of training on a weekly basis because all of the lifts encompass virtually the entire body. Nobody does OLAD with preacher curls or lateral raises.
Mind you, the above is all suspect and subject to change on an individual basis, but I believe it to be true, when speaking in generalities.
I actually agree with a lot of what huey has been saying on here. I think he’s kind of gone about it in an arrogant way, but that’s just some people’s style, so whatever. I think a lot of the problem that people are having is the “fanboyism” that a lot of people have towards the authors on this site. I think a lot of times the hero worship that these authors get is very deserved because they are all very qualified and provide a lot of great advice for free.
However, just because Dan John likes a program or thinks it’s hard, doesn’t mean it’s beyond reproach. I feel like a lot of people are just attacking him because he’s attacking OLAD and not evaluating and responding to the points he has attempted to make.
All training programs should attempt to raise somebody’s peak performance as well as their ability to handle both volume (fatigue) and frequency. I think what huey is calling a “noob” is a trainee who doesn’t have very developed frequency and fatigue tolerances. It’s possible for people to have trained for a long time but not to have raised their toleration to a specific type of training. I believe that proper training and sequencing should address this. The problem with following a general training program is that you are kind of guessing and hoping that it will fit your needs.
I think that at some point a trainee should develop the work capacity to handle more work than OLAD. I don’t think it means that OLAD is only for noobs, but I think that exercise selection must be done carefully so that they fit properly.