New Routine... Thoughts?

Bigger Stronger Leaner Competitive Bodybuilding
1

First gained some inspiration from Dan John’s “Southwood” routine with the rep range but then developed it from there

It’s a 3 a week FBR

Week 1 Reps - 12-10-8 (90 secs rest - weight stays the same through 3 sets)
Week 2 Reps - 10-8-6 with increased weight from previous week(90 secs rest - weight stays the same on all sets)
Week 3 Reps - 8-6-4 with increased weight from previous week (90 secs rest - weight stays the same on all sets)
DELOAD (3-7 days)
REPEAT with higher starting weight

A
Power cleans
Military Press
Front squats
Pull Ups
Leg raises (3x15)

B (same set up)
Snatch (change rep scheme, just do triple/doubles/singles)
deadlift
bench press
dips
Face pulls (2x15)

C (Same ret up)
Clean and press
Back squats
Incline Press
Pendlay Rows
weighted sit ups (3x8)

done all 3 with the 8-6-4 rep scheme as a trial run and fair play feels really challenging but effective!

hopefully my set up with the factored in increases in weight and changing the rep schemes I’ll be able to hit PB’s at a regular pace and should work well for strength and hypertrophy.

What do u guys think?

2

why do you need a deload after only 3 weeks training low % of your max?

3

the deload is down to preference, that’s why I put down 3-7 days, wendler’s 531 had a full week after every 3 weeks and seems quite popular!

Also you don’t train at low % of your max, on week 1 you shoot for your 12RM making all 3 sets close to failure when u factor in fatigue in the 10 and 8 rep sets.

The same applies to week 2 and 3.

4

Performing cleans for high reps kind of defeats the purpose of the exercise and I can almost guarantee that your cleans look like shitty cheated reverse curls if you work them in the 8-12 rep range.

Also, what is your current level of development?

5

[quote]bigmac73nh wrote:
Performing cleans for high reps kind of defeats the purpose of the exercise and I can almost guarantee that your cleans look like shitty cheated reverse curls if you work them in the 8-12 rep range.

Also, what is your current level of development? [/quote]

no mate their not shitty reverse curls, form is pretty good, not saying perfect but am I PT and have done olympic lifting courses.

However I was thinking about training the cleans at a lower rep range, possibly

week 1 - 8-6-4
week 2 - 6-4-2
week 3 - 5-3-1

In terms of development, been weight training for about 17 years and quite strong and in reasonable shape so a standard FBR like starting strength, etc may not be the best fit ATM.

6

[quote]danchubbz wrote:

[quote]bigmac73nh wrote:
Performing cleans for high reps kind of defeats the purpose of the exercise and I can almost guarantee that your cleans look like shitty cheated reverse curls if you work them in the 8-12 rep range.

Also, what is your current level of development? [/quote]

no mate their not shitty reverse curls, form is pretty good, not saying perfect but am I PT and have done olympic lifting courses.

However I was thinking about training the cleans at a lower rep range, possibly

week 1 - 8-6-4
week 2 - 6-4-2
week 3 - 5-3-1

In terms of development, been weight training for about 17 years and quite strong and in reasonable shape so a standard FBR like starting strength, etc may not be the best fit ATM. [/quote]

Bigmac, I really don’t understand your statement. What is wrong with high reps?

South wood is a beginner program (similar to SS and SL 5x5). And yours looks more like a Frankenstein of 5/3/1 and Southwood. Nothing “wrong” with it, but let us know how it is after a couple of years.

Also, south wood was developped as a “team oriented” workout. As in 3-4 people doing the same thing in tandem. How is it working out with just you?

7

[quote]JFG wrote:
Bigmac, I really don’t understand your statement. What is wrong with high reps?[/quote]

I was only speaking regarding the cleans, not high reps in general. Why WOULD you train oly lifts in a high rep range? They are more about moving the bar through a ROM as explosively as possible than fatigue accumulation. I’m not saying they need to be trained at a low volume, it just makes sense to hit more sets of fewer reps rather than fewer sets more reps if you want to work them at a high volume because it will help avoid form breakdown (for example, the shitty reverse curls that I was mentioning).

EDIT: I should have been more specific- I meant that the reps coming later in the set would not have the same form quality as the earlier reps, not that ALL reps would necessarily be bad.

8

[quote]danchubbz wrote:
no mate their not shitty reverse curls, form is pretty good, not saying perfect but am I PT and have done olympic lifting courses.

However I was thinking about training the cleans at a lower rep range, possibly

week 1 - 8-6-4
week 2 - 6-4-2
week 3 - 5-3-1

In terms of development, been weight training for about 17 years and quite strong and in reasonable shape so a standard FBR like starting strength, etc may not be the best fit ATM. [/quote]

Thanks for the additional information. Sounds like you have a lot of training experience, so sorry for assuming. I noticed the low post count and the full body split posted in the bodybuilding forum, which has been a common trend among beginners who have developed/are in the process of developing serious physique imbalances. Since you have that much experience and are a PT, I’m going to assume that you have the MMC quality required to avoid such imbalances- just didn’t want to do so to start.

As I mentioned to JFG, I wasn’t quite clear in my first post- what I meant to say is that the form would break down throughout the course of the set of high volume cleans and the later reps wouldn’t be of the same quality as the former reps. That is assuming that you use enough weight on the early reps and aren’t using low weight just to make it through the latter reps with good form (in which case the earlier reps probably wouldn’t be as productive anyway). Are you seriously committed to performing only three sets per olympic lift? I just think it would be sensible to perform a greater number of sets in the 1-3 rep range on those exercises- that way you’ll still accumulate a good amount of volume and fatigue, but you’ll still be able to work heavier and maintain a higher standard of form for ALL reps.

Just my thoughts. Again, sorry for making assumptions. Even as someone who trains full body, I’ve been conditioned to cringe at full body splits proposed by those with BBing goals because most of those posters haven’t done what they need to in order to make optimal aesthetic gains from such a programming split lol.

EDIT: If you aren’t able or willing to work more sets of cleans at a lower volume, your suggested changes to the rep scheme/progression do look better.

9

[quote]JFG wrote:

[quote]danchubbz wrote:

[quote]bigmac73nh wrote:
Performing cleans for high reps kind of defeats the purpose of the exercise and I can almost guarantee that your cleans look like shitty cheated reverse curls if you work them in the 8-12 rep range.

Also, what is your current level of development? [/quote]

no mate their not shitty reverse curls, form is pretty good, not saying perfect but am I PT and have done olympic lifting courses.

However I was thinking about training the cleans at a lower rep range, possibly

week 1 - 8-6-4
week 2 - 6-4-2
week 3 - 5-3-1

In terms of development, been weight training for about 17 years and quite strong and in reasonable shape so a standard FBR like starting strength, etc may not be the best fit ATM. [/quote]

Bigmac, I really don’t understand your statement. What is wrong with high reps?

South wood is a beginner program (similar to SS and SL 5x5). And yours looks more like a Frankenstein of 5/3/1 and Southwood. Nothing “wrong” with it, but let us know how it is after a couple of years.

Also, south wood was developped as a “team oriented” workout. As in 3-4 people doing the same thing in tandem. How is it working out with just you?
[/quote]

yeah realise southwood is a team training template just tried doing the rep range (8-6-4) and kept the weight on the bar the same to see how it fely and TBH it was really good so I evolved it from there by:
-changing the weight on the bar to different exercises
-bring in different rep ranges but with same principles
-bring in different sessions to cover more exercises instead of just clean/press/front squat/bench press

I suppose I also have a slight influence from wendler’s 531 by going for PB’s on big moves with different weights for 3 weeks then have a short break/cruise then starting from the start with a higher weight.

10

[quote]bigmac73nh wrote:

[quote]danchubbz wrote:
no mate their not shitty reverse curls, form is pretty good, not saying perfect but am I PT and have done olympic lifting courses.

However I was thinking about training the cleans at a lower rep range, possibly

week 1 - 8-6-4
week 2 - 6-4-2
week 3 - 5-3-1

In terms of development, been weight training for about 17 years and quite strong and in reasonable shape so a standard FBR like starting strength, etc may not be the best fit ATM. [/quote]

Thanks for the additional information. Sounds like you have a lot of training experience, so sorry for assuming. I noticed the low post count and the full body split posted in the bodybuilding forum, which has been a common trend among beginners who have developed/are in the process of developing serious physique imbalances. Since you have that much experience and are a PT, I’m going to assume that you have the MMC quality required to avoid such imbalances- just didn’t want to do so to start.

As I mentioned to JFG, I wasn’t quite clear in my first post- what I meant to say is that the form would break down throughout the course of the set of high volume cleans and the later reps wouldn’t be of the same quality as the former reps. That is assuming that you use enough weight on the early reps and aren’t using low weight just to make it through the latter reps with good form (in which case the earlier reps probably wouldn’t be as productive anyway). Are you seriously committed to performing only three sets per olympic lift? I just think it would be sensible to perform a greater number of sets in the 1-3 rep range on those exercises- that way you’ll still accumulate a good amount of volume and fatigue, but you’ll still be able to work heavier and maintain a higher standard of form for ALL reps.

Just my thoughts. Again, sorry for making assumptions. Even as someone who trains full body, I’ve been conditioned to cringe at full body splits proposed by those with BBing goals because most of those posters haven’t done what they need to in order to make optimal aesthetic gains from such a programming split lol.

EDIT: If you aren’t able or willing to work more sets of cleans at a lower volume, your suggested changes to the rep scheme/progression do look better.[/quote]

no need to apologise all feedback welcome!

also going on what u said about FBR and bodybuilding I think for most, especially if their natural I think FBR or upper/lower is still better for achieving a better physique than bodypart splits.

11

[quote]danchubbz wrote:

[quote]bigmac73nh wrote:

[quote]danchubbz wrote:
no mate their not shitty reverse curls, form is pretty good, not saying perfect but am I PT and have done olympic lifting courses.

However I was thinking about training the cleans at a lower rep range, possibly

week 1 - 8-6-4
week 2 - 6-4-2
week 3 - 5-3-1

In terms of development, been weight training for about 17 years and quite strong and in reasonable shape so a standard FBR like starting strength, etc may not be the best fit ATM. [/quote]

Thanks for the additional information. Sounds like you have a lot of training experience, so sorry for assuming. I noticed the low post count and the full body split posted in the bodybuilding forum, which has been a common trend among beginners who have developed/are in the process of developing serious physique imbalances. Since you have that much experience and are a PT, I’m going to assume that you have the MMC quality required to avoid such imbalances- just didn’t want to do so to start.

As I mentioned to JFG, I wasn’t quite clear in my first post- what I meant to say is that the form would break down throughout the course of the set of high volume cleans and the later reps wouldn’t be of the same quality as the former reps. That is assuming that you use enough weight on the early reps and aren’t using low weight just to make it through the latter reps with good form (in which case the earlier reps probably wouldn’t be as productive anyway). Are you seriously committed to performing only three sets per olympic lift? I just think it would be sensible to perform a greater number of sets in the 1-3 rep range on those exercises- that way you’ll still accumulate a good amount of volume and fatigue, but you’ll still be able to work heavier and maintain a higher standard of form for ALL reps.

Just my thoughts. Again, sorry for making assumptions. Even as someone who trains full body, I’ve been conditioned to cringe at full body splits proposed by those with BBing goals because most of those posters haven’t done what they need to in order to make optimal aesthetic gains from such a programming split lol.

EDIT: If you aren’t able or willing to work more sets of cleans at a lower volume, your suggested changes to the rep scheme/progression do look better.[/quote]

no need to apologise all feedback welcome!

also going on what u said about FBR and bodybuilding I think for most, especially if their natural I think FBR or upper/lower is still better for achieving a better physique than bodypart splits.[/quote]

I agree, to an extent. I think a bodypart split is better for beginners, since it’s more forgiving on recovery (FBR requires much more efficient exercise selection) and will make sure that said beginner has good recruitment for all muscle groups. Once a trainee is at the point where MMC/recruitment are good, I absolutely think that training at a high frequency (either through a FBR or upper/lower split) is excellent.

I just see a lot of beginners on here jumping the gun and moving to training with only the big lifts before they learn how to make the muscles work, then complaining that they have lagging bodyparts. I firmly believe that the big lifts are the best physique AND strength builders, but they don’t work as well for aesthetics when they are reduced to moving the bar from point A to point B without attention to recruiting the proper muscles throughout the ROM.

12

[quote]bigmac73nh wrote:

[quote]danchubbz wrote:

[quote]bigmac73nh wrote:

[quote]danchubbz wrote:
no mate their not shitty reverse curls, form is pretty good, not saying perfect but am I PT and have done olympic lifting courses.

However I was thinking about training the cleans at a lower rep range, possibly

week 1 - 8-6-4
week 2 - 6-4-2
week 3 - 5-3-1

In terms of development, been weight training for about 17 years and quite strong and in reasonable shape so a standard FBR like starting strength, etc may not be the best fit ATM. [/quote]

Thanks for the additional information. Sounds like you have a lot of training experience, so sorry for assuming. I noticed the low post count and the full body split posted in the bodybuilding forum, which has been a common trend among beginners who have developed/are in the process of developing serious physique imbalances. Since you have that much experience and are a PT, I’m going to assume that you have the MMC quality required to avoid such imbalances- just didn’t want to do so to start.

As I mentioned to JFG, I wasn’t quite clear in my first post- what I meant to say is that the form would break down throughout the course of the set of high volume cleans and the later reps wouldn’t be of the same quality as the former reps. That is assuming that you use enough weight on the early reps and aren’t using low weight just to make it through the latter reps with good form (in which case the earlier reps probably wouldn’t be as productive anyway). Are you seriously committed to performing only three sets per olympic lift? I just think it would be sensible to perform a greater number of sets in the 1-3 rep range on those exercises- that way you’ll still accumulate a good amount of volume and fatigue, but you’ll still be able to work heavier and maintain a higher standard of form for ALL reps.

Just my thoughts. Again, sorry for making assumptions. Even as someone who trains full body, I’ve been conditioned to cringe at full body splits proposed by those with BBing goals because most of those posters haven’t done what they need to in order to make optimal aesthetic gains from such a programming split lol.

EDIT: If you aren’t able or willing to work more sets of cleans at a lower volume, your suggested changes to the rep scheme/progression do look better.[/quote]

no need to apologise all feedback welcome!

also going on what u said about FBR and bodybuilding I think for most, especially if their natural I think FBR or upper/lower is still better for achieving a better physique than bodypart splits.[/quote]

I agree, to an extent. I think a bodypart split is better for beginners, since it’s more forgiving on recovery (FBR requires much more efficient exercise selection) and will make sure that said beginner has good recruitment for all muscle groups. Once a trainee is at the point where MMC/recruitment are good, I absolutely think that training at a high frequency (either through a FBR or upper/lower split) is excellent.

I just see a lot of beginners on here jumping the gun and moving to training with only the big lifts before they learn how to make the muscles work, then complaining that they have lagging bodyparts. I firmly believe that the big lifts are the best physique AND strength builders, but they don’t work as well for aesthetics when they are reduced to moving the bar from point A to point B without attention to recruiting the proper muscles throughout the ROM.[/quote]

would probably have to agree to disagree on this one mate!

I think beginners should definately begin with FBR 2-3 x week

something like

A
Bench
Rows
Squats
Core

B
OHP
Deadlifts
Pull Ups
Core

Rep range 3/4 x 6-8

13

[quote]danchubbz wrote:
would probably have to agree to disagree on this one mate!

I think beginners should definately begin with FBR 2-3 x week

something like

A
Bench
Rows
Squats
Core

B
OHP
Deadlifts
Pull Ups
Core

Rep range 3/4 x 6-8
[/quote]

Understandable, this issue is debated fairly heavily on this forum.

I definitely don’t think there’s anything wrong with that type of programming for beginners with goals specific to powerlifting or sports, I just wouldn’t recommend it to someone with strict bodybuilding goals.

14

[quote]bigmac73nh wrote:

[quote]danchubbz wrote:
would probably have to agree to disagree on this one mate!

I think beginners should definately begin with FBR 2-3 x week

something like

A
Bench
Rows
Squats
Core

B
OHP
Deadlifts
Pull Ups
Core

Rep range 3/4 x 6-8
[/quote]

Understandable, this issue is debated fairly heavily on this forum.

I definitely don’t think there’s anything wrong with that type of programming for beginners with goals specific to powerlifting or sports, I just wouldn’t recommend it to someone with strict bodybuilding goals.[/quote]

again though if unassisted and for a regular joe with regular genetics i still tbink FBR and upper/lower will be better for bodybuilding