[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
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.
[/quote]
Of course, Huey is right about the importance of high volume training. High volume training is a good thing, and none of the responses that I have seen have said that it isn’t.
If anyone can be accused of fanboyism it’s Huey. As far as he is concerned if it isn’t high volume then its crap (or to use his terminology, it’s for “noobs”), and that’s just stupid. If getting stronger was as easy as simply doing piles of sets and adding weight to the bar every week then every one of us here would be lifting pickup trucks over our heads.
There’s nothing “noobish” about mixing in a cycle of OLAD. Quite the opposite. If you stick to a high volume routine year round then you are almost certainly giving up gains. Unless, of course, you are on the juice. But that’s a whole different ball o’ twine.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
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.
[/quote]
Of course not, there are entire threads where Dan John discusses OLAD variations with people. Dan is a personable guy with a lot of experience, but he doesn’t pretend to be the grand high poobah of training. His advice is invariable, “I don’t know. Go try it.”
No one is arguing that high volume high frequency workouts aren’t important too. In fact, someone responded that a Waterbury style workout would be a good way to follow up a cycle of OLAD.
Huey basically barged in to a thread about what to do following an OLAD cycle with “people that do OLAD are noobs.” What do you expect us to do, give the guy a cookie? I mean seriously this is the exact quote:
Quite frankly, that’s crap. Someone that only does high volume training is the one that’s the noob. Mixing in a cycle of something different is good.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
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.
[/quote]
Yes, and I would argue that someone is equally a “noob” if they have always tried to increase their frequency and fatigue tolerance and have never worked towards increasing limit strength.
I would agree with Huey that only a noob would do OLAD all of the time, but I would also add that anyone that only does one kind of training (whatever kind that might be) is equally a noob.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
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.[/quote]
Precisely, but that’s not what Huey is saying.
Here’s the basic argument.
Huey: Volume is King! Everything else is for noobs.
Everyone else: Volume is great, but periodization is important if you don’t want to stagnate.
Huey: You are a noob.
Now, if that is not an accurate description of Huey’s argument then I apologize to Huey.