Skidmark's Training

2008-5-2

Lower + arms (deload)
Partial Anderson Squats (6th pin - 8" above parallel)
225x8
315x10
415x12 (60% volume)

Zercher Lift
245x1,1,1,1 (80% intensity)

Romanian Deadlift
305x3,3 (60% volume)

Lying Triceps Extension
95x10
115x5
140x3,3,3 (60% volume)

Barbell Curls
95x5
115x5
130x3,3 (60% volume)

Nice and quick. Lost a lot of gas after the partial squats but kept at it. Should be able to get 15 straight reps after the deload and then I can drop the height. It’s a good progression scheme. I can feel my body adapting between sessions.

Zerchers were strangely heavy even with the 50 lb drop. Maybe my back was tired. The partials are involving more back and glutes as the height drops.

Cleaned up form on the RDL’s and now targeting the correct muscles. Gotta concentrate on keeping the right shoulder pulled in. I have a tendency to let it slacken. This is bad because it further stretches the ligaments of an already too-loose shoulder. The good news is that I’m aware of it and so can take appropriate action to fix it.

LTE’s felt light so I need to check if I’m cheating…

I’m starting not to like curls.

Damn guy they took your whole thread and moved it. Don’t know how their deciding but we’ll keep reading.

Yeah - I was wondering how Father WalkingDead escaped being moved…

Brings up the question of what the criteria are for relocation.

Not to my preference, but I guess I’ll work with it.

edit:

Oh, Hell. I’m surrounded by bodybuilders.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that…

[quote]skidmark wrote:
Yeah - I was wondering how Father WalkingDead escaped being moved…

Brings up the question of what the criteria are for relocation.

Not to my preference, but I guess I’ll work with it.

edit:

Oh, Hell. I’m surrounded by bodybuilders.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that…[/quote]

Maybe they made the selection based on those who are doing real training, like you, and some of the rest of us, like me! Keep up the details on what you think is working, and why: most appreciated.

1Geech has asked for details and I feel an obligation to explain this right turn into doing partials. Okay - that’s not strictly true - I just like to expound and have an inflated sense of self-importance and 1Geech gave me an excuse…

I’ve used them in the past though not to the extreme I’m doing them now - only one or three reps mostly for max effort days when I was doing WSB template. I started doing partials because I’ve been diddling around at 300-350 lbs in the squat for 2+ years and I’m sick of it.

However, Paul Anderson, Steve Justa, bud Jeffries and some others have recommended that aspiring lifters use high rep partials shading to single rep full range movement as a means of progression. I believe there is some merit to this approach and here’s why:

Volume and intensity have something of a complementary relationship and I believe this relationship is explained by physics and the definition “work.” Work is simply a measurement of force moving a mass over a distance irrespective of time.

One can do a great deal of “work” with a light weight, moving it many times insofar as the metabolic capabilities of the involved muscles will allow, or moving a heavy weight a very short distance very many times.

Everyone knows that some repetition exercise must be done in order to condition the muscles to perform a 1 rep max, either as warmup sets or as separate, similar exercises. This is called building work capacity.

The pyramidal nature of increasing weightlifting poundages while reducing reps occurs mostly as a result of neurological and metabolic factors. After all, the structural strength is always there for whatever 1 rep max you can perform at any given time. Presumably, if the proper metabolic cofactors could be fed to the muscle and brain in limitless amounts as needed, the muscles could continue to perform that 1 rep max to the point of boredom.

My thought is that the multiple rep work in partials is training the body to produce the metabolic/neurological cofactors in sufficient amounts to allow you to lift a heavier weight once. Or move the same weight over a longer distance fewer times.

Partials are distance progression. Usually by inches. Each extension of the distance, requires that you perform fewer reps because more “work” is being performed and the cofactors mentioned above are depleted sooner (in terms of reps).

So the progression goes, do X reps at height h, do x-2 reps at height h-2", do x-4 reps at height h-4", and so on. OR work back up to the previous number of reps at the new height before increasing the range of motion. This last is not practical when one is working with weights in excess of 100 pounds of a current max.

In other words, lifting something for a lot of reps in a short range of motion, conditions you to lift that something for slightly fewer reps in a slightly longer range of motion. (This could have been the whole post right here)

Paul Anderson used it to good effect for his squats (reputedly squatted 1200), Bud Jeffries for his 1000lb bottom-up squat and others have used it for deadlifting - Bob Peoples being one (700+ DL at 180 lbs or so), I think.

Multi-rep partials are dull and they are grueling, but they seem to work. I’m keeping full ROM work along with them just to keep the CNS familiar with the pattern. I believe Christian Thibaudeau mentioned something about that.

Okay - that was long.

Excellent write-up Skidmark! Thank you for taking the time. I always enjoy reading what others have gleaned from this vast morass called the internet.

[quote]skidmark wrote:
1Geech has asked for details and I feel an obligation to explain this right turn into doing partials. …

My thought is that the multiple rep work in partials is training the body to produce the metabolic/neurological cofactors in sufficient amounts to allow you to lift a heavier weight once. Or move the same weight over a longer distance fewer times.

So the progression goes, do X reps at height h, do x-2 reps at height h-2", do x-4 reps at height h-4", and so on. OR work back up to the previous number of reps at the new height before increasing the range of motion. This last is not practical when one is working with weights in excess of 100 pounds of a current max.

Multi-rep partials are dull and they are grueling, but they seem to work. I’m keeping full ROM work along with them just to keep the CNS familiar with the pattern. …
[/quote]

Thanks for going into this, Skidmark. I have always been skeptical of partial ROM work, but more likely I have just not understood how to use it properly. You are clearly employing it as a well thought-out tool to attack certain problems in the context of your overall lifting. We’ll keep watching and listening.

Well researched explanation of why you’re doing partials. And thanks for reminding me of Bob Peoples. Had an old B&W picture of him from some mag on my wall when I was a youngster. (I had girls pictures, too!) He was deadlifting some huge amount. If I remember correctly he was pretty lean for the amounts he lifted.

On doing partials. A much debated topic in the throwing communittee. ATG squatting is all the rage for both bodybuilders and powerlifters. Full ROM hits all the muscles so they get all swoll and powerlifters reason if you can lift it from the ground up you’ll be stronger “only” going to 90 degrees.

In throwing, specfically the shot and disc, your legs are never more than a quarter bent. Euro style discus throwers and rotational shot putters have even less of a bend in their leg. Many reason you should teach your muscles to explode from the same position you’ll be using them in.

Of course an equal number argue the same theory as the powerlifters. While my left shoulder prevents me form behind the neck squatting I’m going to try this routine on leg presses and hack squats. Thanks.

I don’t know that partials would have any direct benefit for throwers unless performed explosively and with sub-max weights . You guys are all about fast rate of force development, which means moving sub-maximal weights as fast as possible.

Partials might be used during an accumulation period, attempting to develop more muscle tissue and strength which can then be trained to be more explosive.

Power cleans, jump squats, drop jumps and push press seem more apropos for improving the rate of force development for throwers, but I never competed in track/field or throwing sports nor coached any - so it’s only theory for me.

I think full ROM is needed to keep the joints healthy and the tendons/ligaments stretchy which is why I do a full ROM movement after the partials.

I’m using partials to leapfrog a mental barrier, get stronger and hopefully gain a little weight. I’ve been fighting hungry since starting them. I don’t think I’m getting quicker, though. If I had to hunt for food I think I’d always be looking at the south end of dinner headin’ into the sunset.

[quote]skidmark wrote:
If I had to hunt for food I think I’d always be looking at the south end of dinner headin’ into the sunset.[/quote]

That struck a funny with me I think I must relate or somethin’ not quite ROFL!

2008-5-4

Upper (deload)

Standing Overhead Press
95x6
115x3
125x3
135 4x1 (80% intensity)

Standing Overhead Lockouts (pin 12 - sticking point)
175x4,6,3

Chinups
BW+67.5x1,2,3,4,5

Bench Press
135x6
185x5
220 1x3 (outstandingly painful)
220 1x3 (less painful)
220 1x3 (in the groove - no pain)(60% volume)

Bent Row
220 3x3 (60% volume)

MiniBand face pulls
3x20

I cannot describe just how painful bench was at the start of the heavy sets. So I won’t.

I’m finding that my form on overhead press is wrong. I’ve been bringing my right elbow too far forward under the bar. As soon as I brought it back directly in a vertical line with the bar, the rear shoulder stabilizers kicked in and I could press with no pain. I need to practice this form more, which means I may need to drop weight on the movement. It feels like I’m going to lose the bar forward a little, but I think I’ll get over that.

Same deal for bench. As soon as I took my elbow out further, I was stronger and more stable and the pain went away. Didn’t get that 'til the 3rd set though. How did I get into that funky form to begin with?

Further posting in Over 35 Forum, for those interested.

Thanks.