Tweaking others' programs

[kaydubya]

I'm looking ahead to next year and want to really make some big size/strength gains. I've made some (relatively) decent strength gains the last 6 months or so, but not so much size, so size will likely be my main priority. I would like to do a year-long program that has a balance of strength, size, and fat loss throughout the year, so I'm thinking HGM, NROL, or the year-long program that's been running in Men's Fitness. I'm also looking at picking up Dos' book soon, so if he has a year-long program laid out, then that will be an option as well.

Regardless of the program, I want to make sure that I am able to maximize my results. I am the type of guy who will follow a program to the letter, only making exceptions in the case of not having the proper equipment. I'm worried that this has limited my potential to grow. So I'm wondering how you all address this when using a canned program. To what extent do you change what's prescribed, and in what ways? Do you add exercises (like finishers or maybe even stuff in between other exercises)? Do you do the same exercises but use different set/rep schemes? Do you sub out exercises for reasons other than because you don't have the right equipment? Do you add in an extra day of exercise -- like in a 3-workouts-per-week program, do you add in an extra day to address lagging muscles?

Thanks for all replies!

[PowerManDL]

I know that when I personally start talking about not sticking to established programs and whatnot, it has a lot more to do with your attitude and outlook on training in general, far more than it has to do with the relative trivia of how the program is written out and designed.

Pretty lists of exercises, sets, and reps do not an effective program make.

Understanding the hows and whys of what you're doing (defining your goals, picking exercises/rep ranges/means of progression accordingly, planning recovery, balancing variety and specificity, etc) are way more important. Give your training a "theme" instead of worrying about the nitpicks; as long as everything you do is working towards that theme, you're doing ok.

As for a year-long program? Maybe if you're a competing athlete. If you're just working out for fun, all I can say to that is LOL.

Year-long periodization is fine for athletes that have to manage training stress with competing, and have to spend only certain times of the year developing themselves. If you're just trying to look pretty you don't have that restriction in place.

[Frank.S]

I was going to follow anything for a year, id look at westside for skinny bastards or something like that with lots of variety, heavy weights and a solid base to build on.

I have no clue what movements im doing until about 20 minutes before I goto the gym.. I have no idea on the rep scheme until I start the excersise (with a few exceptions). If your supposed to say, hit a 1rm on a deadlift for some program, and you feel like crap, your deadlift is going to be, crap.

Instinctive training is the best if you have a base of stength/size. Now, have some sort of base template. (Push/Pull tris/pull is what I like for upperbody days for example). But its not going to matter if I do a seated row last, or a bentover row last.. if your progressing you are progressing. Personally, I pick the things I HATE doing 9 times outta 10:p

[JoshDunn]

I personally like Chads book muscle revolution as a great base for information and good programs. I tweak out exercises I don't like eg hack squats, change circuits based around access to equipement, change out diet advice for my preferred nutrition resource (Girth Control). I keep the base the same, wouldn't really change reps or sets as chads have a great mix of them.

[gobbla]

The programming isn't particularly relevant for most people. If you want to use a canned...no problem. You want to get bigger, work really hard and eat enough to gain weight. If you're not gaining weight, you're not getting bigger. If you're not getting bigger you're not eating enough. mmmmmm

[kaydubya]

Thanks for the responses; however, I'm not sure they address exactly what I was getting at. Maybe I didn't ask the right question, or I'm just misguided.

For example, say a program calls for 3x8 pushups. I don't think this would help me achieve my goals because I can easily bang out 3 sets of 8. SO, is this a case where I should feel free to substitute a horizontal push exercise that I think will be more beneficial to me? Either a more difficult push-up variation, or perhaps a bench press? I think the answer is "yes" -- maybe I'm just looking for some validation.

Originally Posted by PowerManDL

As for a year-long program? Maybe if you're a competing athlete. If you're just working out for fun, all I can say to that is LOL.

Year-long periodization is fine for athletes that have to manage training stress with competing, and have to spend only certain times of the year developing themselves. If you're just trying to look pretty you don't have that restriction in place.

I think what you're saying is that you should keep doing programs that advance your own goals, not what someone else thinks your goals should be. Is that correct? If so, I think the programs I am looking at DO address my goals and how I want to progress through the year.

[kaydubya]

Okay, here's another one -- what if the program calls for a squat? Should I feel free to pick whatever variation I desire (Back/Front/overhead/sumo/etc. ) in order to help me meet my goals?

It's almost to Frank S.'s point. If you step back and think of the program as a template, then suppose that the program calls for a vertical pull movement like lat bar pulldowns. What if I feel that I can get more benefit from pull-ups? Should I go ahead and do pull-ups?

[PowerManDL]

Originally Posted by kaydubya

Thanks for the responses; however, I'm not sure they address exactly what I was getting at. Maybe I didn't ask the right question, or I'm just misguided.

For example, say a program calls for 3x8 pushups. I don't think this would help me achieve my goals because I can easily bang out 3 sets of 8. SO, is this a case where I should feel free to substitute a horizontal push exercise that I think will be more beneficial to me? Either a more difficult push-up variation, or perhaps a bench press? I think the answer is "yes" -- maybe I'm just looking for some validation.

A pushup is a specific kind of exercise. It's done with body weight and it's closed-chain as opposed to the open-chain of most pressing movements.

I'd hazard a guess that whatever program you're looking at had those facts in mind when it put them in there.

Even if that's not the case, there's still things like that you have to keep in mind before you just take somebody's template and start hacking exercises in and out of it.

That's probably the weakest way you can customize a workout; it's both a very big deal and a really trivial factor at the same time.

I think what you're saying is that you should keep doing programs that advance your own goals, not what someone else thinks your goals should be. Is that correct? If so, I think the programs I am looking at DO address my goals and how I want to progress through the year.

No, that's not at all what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that year-long periodization is designed for one purpose: to manage, and at some point maximize, the training of competing athletes.

If you're not competing in specific events at specific times of the year, a yearly plan will make you do exactly one thing, and that is sacrifice efficacy for the sake of complexity.

Since the implicit point here is being missed, I'll be more direct:

Don't do a year long program, because that is stupid considering your particular needs.

I really need to have something on tap for this stupid "program fever" mentality, because the written program really doesn't mean a whole lot. Nobody ever seems to "get it" when I say that, and as a result there's a total lack of context in the subsequent communication.

Let me attempt it yet again: a program is a collusion of principles that come together with a specific idea in mind, and then are filtered through an individual's (the coach/trainer/what ever meaningless label) unique biases.

The written program in itself is meaningless to modify and tweak and whatever else without some concept of the underlying strategy and thought processes behind it. This is like taking apart a car and just randomly sticking plastic parts in. You wind up with a mess.

On the other hand, if you actually understand the car's operation and why it's put together as it is, you learn a few things. First, it's pretty easy to take the pieces and put your own car together. Secondly, you find that there are other parts and pieces that can do better (or different) jobs that will make the car work better (or differently).

This is why the program is both critical and meaningless; if you don't know what you're doing, you wind up with a huge mess. I present exhibit A, Bodybuilding.com - The Future Of Bodybuilding! Huge Bodybuilding Site. as evidence.

On the other hand, if you actually understand the underlying machinery at work, the program is largely superfluous. You lose sight of the fact that This Is Program A and This Is Program B, ad infinitum, and start to see that Program A and Program B are for fat loss (or muscle size, or strength, or whatever Uselss Discrete Label you care to pick), and hey, look what they do similarly! It will all boil down to the same concepts, re-organized and re-formatted with a new name.

When looking at programs, it's not the differences that matter as much as the similarities.

So, in summary: Pick something you like, bust your ass, and reap the rewards. Splitting hairs over the irrelevant trivia will net you trivial gains.

That is what I'm trying to say.

[kaydubya]

First I want to say "thanks" for a well-thought-out reply. It has taken me over a day to really chew on this and articulate my thoughts.

Originally Posted by PowerManDL

A pushup is a specific kind of exercise. It's done with body weight and it's closed-chain as opposed to the open-chain of most pressing movements.

I'd hazard a guess that whatever program you're looking at had those facts in mind when it put them in there.

Point taken. This perhaps wasn't the best comparison, so I'll try another -- if it says to do push-ups, should I feel free to do the most challenging push-up variation for me? (I hope you're not shaking your head in frustration at this point!) Just bear with me -- suppose I don't go the route of doing a year-long program and instead progress through various independent programs. Further, let's say that each program says to do push-ups. Is there a reason that I shouldn't do a different type of push-up in the second program than what I did in the first? As I said in my first post, I'm the type of person who will follow a program to the letter, so if it says push-up I will blindly do regular ol' push-ups and thus I may be limiting my potential for growth.

This is also a reason that I was thinking about doing a year-long program -- I would assume that as you progress through the year, the program would introduce variations of the exercises so that you're not always doing the same exercise with the same hand grip or leg stance, as I fear would happen if I were to pick multiple independent programs.

No, that's not at all what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that year-long periodization is designed for one purpose: to manage, and at some point maximize, the training of competing athletes.

If you're not competing in specific events at specific times of the year, a yearly plan will make you do exactly one thing, and that is sacrifice efficacy for the sake of complexity.

Since the implicit point here is being missed, I'll be more direct:

Don't do a year long program, because that is stupid considering your particular needs.

First, I'm not sure how that is too much different from my interpretation of "Do programs to suit my own goals, not someone else's goals."

Second, this seems to be a huge generalization about year-long programs. I haven't seen enough year-long programs to strongly argue against your point, but I don't feel that the goal of the programs I've mentioned is to maximize athletic effectiveness at a given point during the year. The goal as I see it is to provide a balance of strength and hypertrophy while also accounting for a potential need for fat loss. If I decide to follow one of these programs then I'll try to not blindly follow it at the fat loss juncture if I don't feel I need it (but knowing myself, I'll almost certainly need it!)

I will say that the MF Year-long program does have an athletic training mode in late summer/early fall that seems a little "out there" and has some "out there" exercises, which in itself is not enough reason NOT to do it, but space and equipment reasons would play into my decision whether to stick with the program that month or do something else.

I really need to have something on tap for this stupid "program fever" mentality, because the written program really doesn't mean a whole lot. Nobody ever seems to "get it" when I say that, and as a result there's a total lack of context in the subsequent communication.

Let me attempt it yet again: a program is a collusion of principles that come together with a specific idea in mind, and then are filtered through an individual's (the coach/trainer/what ever meaningless label) unique biases.

The written program in itself is meaningless to modify and tweak and whatever else without some concept of the underlying strategy and thought processes behind it. This is like taking apart a car and just randomly sticking plastic parts in. You wind up with a mess.

On the other hand, if you actually understand the car's operation and why it's put together as it is, you learn a few things. First, it's pretty easy to take the pieces and put your own car together. Secondly, you find that there are other parts and pieces that can do better (or different) jobs that will make the car work better (or differently).

That's a great analogy. Unfortunately I don't feel that I've progressed to the point where I can put my own car together. I'm definitely learning, and by this time next year maybe I'll be at that point. It doesn't mean I won't still do canned programs, but maybe I'll be confident that I could make up my own routine if I wanted to.

This is why the program is both critical and meaningless; if you don't know what you're doing, you wind up with a huge mess. I present exhibit A, Bodybuilding.com - The Future Of Bodybuilding! Huge Bodybuilding Site. as evidence.

On the other hand, if you actually understand the underlying machinery at work, the program is largely superfluous. You lose sight of the fact that This Is Program A and This Is Program B, ad infinitum, and start to see that Program A and Program B are for fat loss (or muscle size, or strength, or whatever Uselss Discrete Label you care to pick), and hey, look what they do similarly! It will all boil down to the same concepts, re-organized and re-formatted with a new name.

When looking at programs, it's not the differences that matter as much as the similarities.

Again, great point. Pick any two well-written programs and boil them down and they should essentially have the same ingredients.

So, in summary: Pick something you like, bust your ass, and reap the rewards. Splitting hairs over the irrelevant trivia will net you trivial gains.

That is what I'm trying to say.

Again, thanks for the reply. I don't agree with everything you've said, but you've given me some things to think about.