Pwnisher Q n A

Training Powerlifting
61

[quote]Jlabs wrote:

[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:

For your rack pull experience in general, you have to keep in mind that the rack pull kind of sucks for this. With a mat or block pull, the plates are still the point of contact, such that, when you grab the bar and start the pull, the bar flexes upward. With a rack pull, the bar is the point of contact, so you get zero flex when you start the pull. Additionally, when the bar makes contact with the pins, it can be pretty jarring due to the metal on metal nature of the impact compared to plates hitting blocks or mats. Some folks actually find rack pulls more difficult than deadlifts because of these factors.
[/quote]
Nice, I was wondering your thoughts on rack pulls. You are a very observant lifter and a straightforward/concise writer so it is always good to have your insight. Kick ass on Saturday![/quote]

Much appreciated man, I am glad you are able to benefit from my ramblings, haha. As much as I love the power rack as a piece of equipment, I find that the pins themselves are generally only good for catching a falling bar. When it comes to legit rack work, chains just blow them away.

62

[quote]pcdude wrote:
Jake - thanks for the point to this thread. It is a really interesting training concept, and I am looking forward to seeing where it all leads (and possibly trying it at some point). I wonder if it would be possible to combine ROM progression with a more standard linear/periodized progression so that the full ROM could be trained each week. Pwnisher?[/quote]

In my present training, that’s exactly what I am doing. Full ROM gets trained each week, just not heavy. It’s why it’s pretty crucial to me to have those sets of assistance work that utilizes some aspect of the competition lift.

If your goal is to get in form practice, the best thing you could do is use assistance work that is exactly the lift you are trying to improve. So, for example, you could do bench press after your heavy bench or pressing work for 5x10, strict press after bench or press, and competition style squats after squat or deadlift work.

What I would caution against is attempting to use deadlifts for 5x10. I have never done this myself, and I know Jim Wendler has advocated it in some of his 5/3/1 work, but most of the folks that I know that have attempted this ended up with some sort of injury. I imagine it is user error, such that, people are getting fatigued from the heavy volume and allowing form to deviate with a heavy weight later in the session, but it just requires too much perfection for me to bother with. Personally, to improve my deadlift (and squat to an extent), I use the safety squat bar squat with chains for assistance work. I cannot think of a finer lift.

Now, if you need less form practice and more strength development, you can use some variety for the assistance work while still getting in full ROM work. I listed assistance exercises that I like, but the big takeaway is that you’re still training a similar movement pattern, just with different implements/set-ups. It could even be something as simple as not locking out the weight or bringing the grip out or in 1 finger length, or you could go totally off the reservation and do something like front squats against bands and chains to a box or log bench pressing, it really depends on your ability to figure out what works for you.

Assistance work is where I allow myself to play around in my training. I’ve written about a concept of “accidental strength” before, but to sum it up, sometimes, we don’t know what we are weak on, and just randomly picking an assistance movement we haven’t tried before can result in some pretty crazy strength gains. If lifts go down, it’s time to change things up, but if you are doing 1 legged bosu ball squats against bands and chains while wearing a neck harness and your deadlift is going up, keep doing it, something is working.

63

[quote]AnytimeJake wrote:
It’s funny I mentioned that I was running smolov in an above post, then I was over in your log where you had a rant about smolov, and it made me laugh, just because of the timing. I have a habit of butchering programs so bad, that it’s probably an insult for me to even refer to them by name.

The reason I mention all this is because I get people on my log, giving me shit for changing name brand programs, burt I personaly don’t understand anyone thats been lifting for any length of time, that can follow a program to the letter. I take the basic template, and then change it to suit what I know about my body, and what it likes.

The main thing I get/see when I use smolov is multiple squat sessions a week, on a light, medium, heavy, where you start the next weeks light day, with the past weeks medium day. Constantly upping the weight and the volume. Thats what I take from it, and my bad knee benifits from both the squating frequency, and the fact that the majority of time is spent on sub-max lifting.

I guess this was more of a rant than a question, but I see alot of different program idea’s all smashed up into one when I look at what you do, and I get the feeling that you have the same habit of taking different idea’s from different programs to form one routine. I guess I was wondering what all programs you’ve tried, and then latter used to come to where you are now, and also just your thoughts on name brand programs in general. To me this is a new trend, we never had name brand programs when I started lifting, you just figured it out on your own, somtimes I think this was better.
[/quote]

For me, it depends on the goal when I start. I have performed many routines to the letter, even with their own voodoo attached to include 20 rep squats with the rib cage expansion work and Dogg Crapp with the extreme stretching. If I am trying out a name brand routine to see if it works, I follow the routine exactly so that I can avoid having user error confound my success. I feel that this also allows me to more accurately assess what works from some routines and what does not.

The most recent name brand routine I was running was 5/3/1, but after my hamstring injury, I finally decided to just start using what works, and it’s what has resulted in my current program that I posted about recently.

In terms of programs I have run in the past (as in, to the letter)

Pavel’s 3-5
20 rep squats
Westside Barbell for Skinny Bastards
Westside Barbell template (note: did not train at westside, just using their concepts)
Dogg Crapp
5/3/1

I have also stolen a lot of stuff from Paul Kelso, other Pavel works, Steve Pulcinella’s Iron Sport method, and then of course ROM progression from Paul Anderson/Bob Peoples

All of the above programs worked great for some duration of time. From Pavel’s I built a foundation of size and strength, from 20 rep squats I learned how to rest pause and the real meaning of intensity/mental fortitude. Westside gave me an introduction to the value of assistance work, Dogg Crapp demonstrated to me the value of single set training with rest pausing and volume manipulation, and 5/3/1 showed me you can really get strong off of just 1 top set, along with how to really play with assistance work.

As for name brand programs in general, I think the biggest issue new lifters have is that they think lifting is some sort of witchcraft, where, if you arrange a program in a certain order and give it a certain name, you will get certain results. If I cast the spell of Starting Strength by summoning 3 sets of 5 reps of squats everyday, I will magically become a fat kid with big legs, or if I cast Westside Barbell, I will grow a goatee and squat 900lbs out of a monolift, and if I say “Greg Valentino” three times in a mirror in the dark, he will come out and inject my arms with synthol.

There is SO much focus on “the routine” and so little focus on consistency and time spent. Matt Kroc talked about how he had been training for 20 years before anyone noticed him, and after that, people wanted to know what his secret was. It was 20 years of lifting weights. Routine is pretty much a matter of preference: what gets you in the gym and keeps you from getting beat up. We’re all going to be unique, and there are a ton of great ideas out there, but I feel like we’re overeducated and undertrained as a people.

64

Nice, this was what I was looking for, thanks great answer !

65

[quote]Zen Taco wrote:
What do you do the week before a meet? Do you just go light and still do the same exercises or not much at all?
and where in North Dakota were you? I was in Williston till a few months ago.

Thanks for answering our questions man![/quote]

I’ve always competed on Saturdays, so it may change how others would implement it. The week before the meet, I’m still training hard and heavy, no changes. The week OF the meet, I tend to keep it light. I mostly do pump work to get the blood flowing, and if I hit any competition lifts at all, I’m not putting any weight on the bar, I’m just keeping loose and maintaining form.

Monday will be my “hardest” workout that week, and usually it’s just to get an upper body pump since my shoulder is such a horror show and keeping it moving is pretty beneficial to me, but I’m talking stuff like lateral raises, super light overhead pressing, band pull aparts, light curls, etc. After that, if I hit the gym at all, it’s purely to stay loose. I don’t do any form rolling or stretching, but I may just keep moving through the movement pattern of the competition lifts.

I tend to lose weight during this week due to my appetite being down from decreased activity, which is a plus when trying to make weight.

I was up around Kenmare/Bowbells in ND. Very very cold, good for making me tough, haha.

66

[quote]Lonnie123 wrote:
Very good reading here. I’m seriously considering doing Touch-n-Go DL’s now, whats the worse that could happen, huh? Been doing dead stops for as long as I can remember.[/quote]

It’s definitely worth trying. If dead stops are working for you though, don’t feel as though you need to change it just because touch and gos work for me. I know some folks that can become brutally strong with dead stops, and some folks that grow with TnG.

On a slightly related aside, I will take this time to comment on how much training touch and go with straps benefitted me in my most recent contest. Since I had so much practice pulling with straps, I knew exactly how to set them up and use them for my deadlift for reps event. Conversely, there were a lot of people there that never used straps before, and when given the opportunity to use them, did not know the best way to employ them. Anyone who has ever tried straps knows that there is a bit of a learning curve to it, and if you just wrap fabric around the bar a bunch of times, it’s pretty worthless. By avoiding using straps for whatever reason they had, they in turn handicapped themselves when the opportunity arose to be given an advantage.

I’ve spoken a bit before about my love of philosophy, but this is where I feel like Machiavelli really shines through, such that we need to have the capacity to do “evil” when the need arises. As much as we may detest aids like straps, belts, sleeves, wraps, suits, etc, not knowing how to use them is just handicapping ourselves in the long run. You may be vocally opposed to straps, and then one day you injure your hand and lose grip strength, and now have to spend time learning how to use this tool before you can start training heavy again. You may feel like belts are “cheating” until you sustain a lower back injury and need to use one to rehab. It becomes important to become skilled at the use of these aids for these reasons. I’m actually considering picking up a deadlift suit in the future so I can start learning how to use one, since they’re allowed in strongman comps.

67

[quote]Lonnie123 wrote:
Oh… And LOL at “cambered Dumbbell”[/quote]

Glad you appreciated that, haha. It got a few laughs at the comp as well. Might as well tell some jokes if I’m dealt a bad hand, haha.

68

[quote]LoRez wrote:
Very impressed with the 20 rep deadlifts at the end. Well done man.

As far as the reduced ROM training, especially with the bench, and less so with the overhead press, do you find that getting strong at working from certain “positions” can get you out of the groove when you use the full ROM? Or does it teach you, muscle-memory-wise, exactly where you need to be when you’re at certain points in your lift, so your body just adjusts as you move through the range?

That was kind of a longwinded question. Hopefully it made sense.[/quote]

Thank you for the kind words.

I am a very untechnical presser, so for me, it’s not as though I am consciously aware that I’m at the point where I flare my elbows or do any sort of unique trick with I am pressing, which I think actually makes this type of training a boon for me. It’s more about purely getting stronger, not necessarily better at benching. I train my body to handle much heavier loads than it normally can, and eventually continue to increase the ROM until it is able to work the full range.

I will say though that the whole “get stronger, not better” approach here needs to work both ways. When you are setting up for the lifts of the day, regardless of what they are, you don’t want to set yourself up for the optimal position to be able to move that weight that one day, but instead for that movement to make you stronger in general.

As an example, when I set the bar in the chains for a high suspended squat, it does me no good to flare my legs way wider than I normally do when I squat so that I can cut the ROM down even further and end up moving the bar 1", because when I try to use my normal squat form, I will have only become a better wide stance squatter, not a stronger normal stance squatter.

In terms of certain positions in particular being “out of the groove”, I tend to have one spot in each lift where I am at my weakest in the ROM progression cycle, and it’s never at the lowest point. I may get less reps at the lowest point in the cycle, but at a certain point I will get way less reps than I should at that height all other things being equal, and I imagine it’s because we all will have certain positions due to our unique leverages and body layouts that weaken us when we try to apply force from that position.

The benefit of using full ROM is that you can generally use momentum to blast through this point, and with partial ROM you can go higher than this point, but once you reach it exactly, it sucks.

69

I’ve always wondered about this with the squat, it seems everyone says they stall at the bottom, but I’v noticed you generaly get a 6-12inch rebound, then you stall, little different with everyone, but it seems to me, if you could find that spot where you stall, and get strong there. It would help you get stronger everywhere.

We talked about this the other week, on the deadlift, how there’s a weird spoty with block pulls, 3-4 inch range for me, where I’m actually weaker than from the floor, or even from a deficit, so it makes sense that other lifts would have similar points. Good stuff, lots of interesting points being brought up here. later

70

[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
As for name brand programs in general, I think the biggest issue new lifters have is that they think lifting is some sort of witchcraft, where, if you arrange a program in a certain order and give it a certain name, you will get certain results. If I cast the spell of Starting Strength by summoning 3 sets of 5 reps of squats everyday, I will magically become a fat kid with big legs, or if I cast Westside Barbell, I will grow a goatee and squat 900lbs out of a monolift, and if I say “Greg Valentino” three times in a mirror in the dark, he will come out and inject my arms with synthol.[/quote]

This paragraph was excellent. Its what I’d imagine a room full of powerlifters would sound like trying to play D&D.

71

[quote]StrengthDawg wrote:
BADDASS P… That reeks of awesomeness! I mean, displaying ultimate man skill like that while your woman cheers you on, Does it get any better than that? NOPE, I don’t think so. Congrats and wish you the best in your future endeavors man!
[/quote]

[quote]Zen Taco wrote:
nice job on the comp man! way to gut it out[/quote]

[quote]Ecchastang wrote:
Just want to say thinks for all of the wisdom, insight and info on your blog. I just discovered it a couple weeks ago, and have since read back through last April. I will eventually get it all read. [/quote]

Thank you all for this. Means a lot to have your support.

72

Thanks for that explanation. I’m glad you could make sense of my question ;-).

It does seem there needs to be a balance between pure strength and technical mastery, and I’ve seen a few people get caught up with the technical side of things, and forget about the strength part. (cough myself cough)

I had another question, with regards to specificity and assistance movements. There seem to be two main schools here, one that says “if you want to get better at X, do more X”, and the other that says “if you want to get better at X, do more Y and Z (along with your X)”. A bit oversimplified.

What was it that convinced you of the value of assistance movements?

73

[quote]AnytimeJake wrote:
I’ve always wondered about this with the squat, it seems everyone says they stall at the bottom, but I’v noticed you generaly get a 6-12inch rebound, then you stall, little different with everyone, but it seems to me, if you could find that spot where you stall, and get strong there. It would help you get stronger everywhere.

We talked about this the other week, on the deadlift, how there’s a weird spoty with block pulls, 3-4 inch range for me, where I’m actually weaker than from the floor, or even from a deficit, so it makes sense that other lifts would have similar points. Good stuff, lots of interesting points being brought up here. later[/quote]

Your observation on the squat is similar to one I have made as well, which has led me to a theory that has made me pretty unpopular among the net, haha. I honestly don’t see value in squatting to depth in training. As you noted, the stretch reflex tends to carry one up to a sticking point where strength is necessary, but until that point, you’re relying on the stretch reflex to carry you there. If the stretch reflex doesn’t get you that far, the weight was too heavy in the first place, and you had no chance of squatting it.

Because of these principles, I beleive there is little value in training in the range where the stretch reflex is a factor, and far more value in getting stronger at the point where your stretch reflex no longer contributes. Training in this ROM allows you to use much heavier weight and for me tends to be far easier to recover from compared to squatting to depth, and it allows you to develop the strength necessary to be able to move very heavy weight past where the reflex gives up and it’s up to you to take over.

We see the internet community get very upset whenever someone doesn’t squat to depth in training, but I honestly find this to just be dogma that has become universally accepted that you ALWAYS have to squat to depth or it “doesn’t count”. Its similar to this go to phrase of how you have to “practice how you play” (which is a future rant for my blog), which I find holds little value in someone wanting to become stronger. Instead, when it comes to the squat, I train the parts I want to make stronger (namely, the aspect of the squat where I find strength is a necessity) and do not train the parts that I do not need to make stronger.

74

[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
I honestly find this to just be dogma that has become universally accepted that you ALWAYS have to squat to depth or it “doesn’t count”.[/quote]
It seems like on the internet, people complain about going against the grain until it works, then it’s praised that someone challenged the status quo. They’re then thought of as an innovator

75

Your back problems sound eerily familiar. For me, it?s always been unloading the weight that causes problems. When it?s bad, I can actually still squat relatively pain free, but setting the weight back down in the rack will hurt like hell, and then it sucks getting out of bed in the morning.

I seem to tweak something at least a couple of times a year. This last layoff took me out of squatting and pulling for like 6 months.

76

I think as you’ve stated, having to work around an injury, seems to make you a beter trainer in the end, I almost wish I could disect the other lifts the way I have with the squat due to a knee injury. When you have an injury you seem to obsess over every little detail of the lift that affects that area, and I think I’ve tried every combination of things, in order to keep my squat moving, and keep me pain free.

You seem to have an ability to see the obvious, and state it, (explain it ). I’ve always been doing this with my squat, but never really thought about transferring that mind set, to lifts not affected by my injury. I don’t know if that makes sense, but it seems to me, thats what you’ve done. At least thats one of the things you’ve done, and it’s changed my way of thinking about other lifts. If ya get that, Thanks

77

Thanks for this thread, much to learn and already have learned much. The deadlift video opened my eyes to a few things as well. I can appreciate the “I always use straps until competition” bit. I have a weak grip, but I try to balance out my training with singles without straps, but if I’m going for reps/conditioning, hell yes I use them.

By the way, where is the link to his blog? I pulled a muscle in my brain this morning and it hasn’t been working right all day.

These days, I’m getting so much more out of all the learning and experience folks share than the actual training/progress itself. And this is after 20 years now of lifting. Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy making the gains, I enjoy putting in the time and work, but I’m finally learning as I get well into my 30s that there is always a way that make work better for me that may not be the case for someone else.

Allow me to ask this: can you delve more into Leg Drive with deads, especially as it pertains to quad and glute activation? Thanks, and keep it up!

78

^^^ ‘‘Mythical Strength’’ ^^^ they don’t let us do links here anymore, unless it’s a site thats tied into T nation, like EFT’s, but there ya go, I’m sure you can figure it out.

79

[quote]TB284 wrote:

[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
As for name brand programs in general, I think the biggest issue new lifters have is that they think lifting is some sort of witchcraft, where, if you arrange a program in a certain order and give it a certain name, you will get certain results. If I cast the spell of Starting Strength by summoning 3 sets of 5 reps of squats everyday, I will magically become a fat kid with big legs, or if I cast Westside Barbell, I will grow a goatee and squat 900lbs out of a monolift, and if I say “Greg Valentino” three times in a mirror in the dark, he will come out and inject my arms with synthol.[/quote]

This paragraph was excellent. Its what I’d imagine a room full of powerlifters would sound like trying to play D&D.[/quote]

I definitely have experience in that realm, haha. I am a huge nerd. Magic the gathering, DnD, video games, the whole 9.

80

[quote]LoRez wrote:
Thanks for that explanation. I’m glad you could make sense of my question ;-).

It does seem there needs to be a balance between pure strength and technical mastery, and I’ve seen a few people get caught up with the technical side of things, and forget about the strength part. (cough myself cough)

I had another question, with regards to specificity and assistance movements. There seem to be two main schools here, one that says “if you want to get better at X, do more X”, and the other that says “if you want to get better at X, do more Y and Z (along with your X)”. A bit oversimplified.

What was it that convinced you of the value of assistance movements?[/quote]

I would say you could boil down those two schools of thought to either

1: Get better at the movement
2: Get stronger for the movement

I think they both have their merits, and it ultimately depends on what your goals are and what is weak in your training. It’s easy to think that the best way to build up a weak lift is to just keep building up the lift so that you get stronger (having a “strength weakness” as Jim Wendler put it, which I think is an awesome phrase), but I find, in many cases, when one has some sort of weakness in a movement, when they keep doing the movement, they will only get stronger at the parts they are strong at and remain weak at their weak points.

If, for example, on the bench press, you are weak off your chest, then doing multiple full ROM bench presses is just going to keep reinforcing your chest weakness with every rep. However, if you were to instead do benching where you only did the first half of the bench and completely ignored the lockout, you’d waste no energy on your strong point, and totally hammer the weak point the entire time.

I do think that it is worth trending similar movement patterns when trying to build up your primary lifts with assistance work. For example, if I want to build a bigger press, I find it’s worthwhile to do SOME manner of pressing in my assistance work (incline, dip, overhead, flat bench, various bars, bands, chains, etc) versus trying to build my chest with flyes, arms with extensions, shoulders with raises, etc, but in terms of just developing plain old brute strength, I don’t think specificity is entirely necessary in assistance work.

Going along with the “stronger, not better” approach I spoke of earlier, when you wrote “Do more Y and Z along with your X”, I think it’s worth noting that I rarely ever train the competition lifts in order to get better at them. I bench, squat and deadlift once every 2 months, and even then, none of them are performed in a competition style. All of my training is about simply building the lift, not necessarily training it, so I am doing the things that I find beneficial toward making those lifts stronger. I find that the competition lifts themselves are not ideal for strength development, as their focus is based on form, not technique (ie: I need to move the weight from A to B, rather than I need to move the weight using my glutes, hams and quads).

This is getting long winded, but to address the question of how I learned the value of assistance work, it was after spending many years following abbreviated training and not making any progress. Abbreviated training built a great foundation of size and strength for me, but eventually, I had tapped it out for all it was worth. I started following 5/3/1, because I decided I needed to quit writing my own programs and follow someone else. I got some injuries during that time and really embraced ROM progression for my main lifts, but the assistance work really helped me continue to get bigger and stronger. Especially worth noting on the “bigger” side of the equation, as I put on about 15lbs in 1 year following the program, and had changed so dramatically that one of my wife’s co-workers thought she had gotten divorced and remarried when he saw me walking with my wife, because I looked nothing like the guy he had met before.

I thought that was pretty cool, haha.