I started 531 a few months but then got really sick so I had to take two months off from the gym. I squatted yesterday using a TM that is 25lbs less than my previous cycle 1 TM and I ended up failing the second last set on the 531 sets.
I basically lost about 60+lbs on my max and would have to lower my TM by about 60lbs. That means it would take around 9 cycles (6 months)just to regain my strength and that sounds too long to me. Would it be better to just use a weekly progression routine or even starting strength to quickly regain my strength with muscle memory and then try 531 again? Thanks.
It won’t take you X cycles to regain your strength. That’s not how training and using a TM works. The TM and submax training is a tool. When used appropriately, it is used as a way to build your strengh NOT test your strength. Use the appropriate TM for your current strength, use FSL work for some extra volume. Patient progress yields fast results. I have seen it too many times to be a coincidence.
There is a reason why when we test people in our gym - they all use TM well below where they test. For example, a few weeks ago we had a guy test his deadlift as part of his sixth week. After doing his PR set, we worked up to 425 for 5. His TM is 365.
In the beginner realm, we had a guy who was in sixth week. Again, after his PR set on squat, he worked up to 185 for 6. His TM was 145.
All do 5’s PRO, FSL for 5x5-10 (depending on where they are in training cycle) and a few assistance movements. Both train 2 times a week: squat and bench on one day. Pull and press the other. Box jumps/mex ball throws are done on both days. Peowler is done as long as weather is appropriate (no snow or ice and it’s not below freezing). Sixth week is reserved for PR work and occasional Jokers.
That is interesting. Basically, those guys in your gym are making great progress with low (1x / week) frequency. Is this due primarily to scheduling constraints? Or is that what you recommend in general – high frequency isn’t necessarily better, even for beginners?
Jim out of curiosity, are you finding 5’s pro to the be superior training method to the 5/3/1 or 3/5/1 scheme (for the typical training day), or is it just better for gauging other variables being utilized?
[quote]craze9 wrote:
That is interesting. Basically, those guys in your gym are making great progress with low (1x / week) frequency. Is this due primarily to scheduling constraints? Or is that what you recommend in general – high frequency isn’t necessarily better, even for beginners? [/quote]
This is how my scheduke works out (as do theirs). You have to remember that in search for “optimal” people forget that many times, your life will dictate how many days a week you train. Then it’s up to you to make that work. And it will always work as long as your attitude and effort is right. I discuss this in the Beyond book.
Optimal is not based on science or trends. It’s based on effort and attitude.
Interesting philosophy. You’re right that ultimately “optimal” is only optimal insofar as it applies to a specific person and situation, and their ability to progress. Thanks for the response.