I'll admit that it's the hugeness of the plan that got to me, too. Then it's that you read some books but didn't do their programs and whipped up your own.
The big concern that I have with people who are relatively new to this is the lack of a system for ensuring improvement. Lots of ways to do that, but I'm not sure you know how to do it. It can be as simple as making sure you lift more weight on the same exercise over time.
As gimmicky as you think they are, periodization schemes in programs are doing that. You (you as in "one") might not see it. It's not just about changing the reps/sets. If you can insure that you are going up in weight on the bar, you don't need periodization (or set/rep changes) for a long time. Especially in a beginner. Starting Strength's 5x5 works for a long time.
Also, that upper push/upper pull thing has a use, particularly if you're short on time. The first programs I did (over 6 years ago) had those bult in. I don't know if it qualifies as a gimmick if we're still doing it and finding it useful today.
BTW, it's good that you have a long term plan. I commend it. Just startoff with someone else's program in your plan.
I've been training for eight years straight and have done programs by most of the major experts. I've even been coached by some of those experts. I still don't think I am competent to write my own program.
After all that experience who can possibly be more competent than yourself to write your programmes?
The answer is you...you grasshopper you Even the experts you speak of had to learn from someone else. Right?
The fact is there are a few very basic rules to work by. The rest is "baffle them with bullshit".
Maybe that's Mahler's problem -- he's incapable of bullshit.
That would also explain why I've been creating my own programs for years now...
I think that there comes a time (in Mahlers case 8 years) when an intelligent person becomes qualified to write their own programmes based on what they have gleaned from various solid sources. Not to mention that by this time they know their own bodies.
I for one have no problem with putting together a programme for myself (or others) based on what I have learned from reading and applying the following.
Cressey's Maximum Strength
Everything Cosgrove
Dos Romedios Explosive Training
Chads Huge in a Hurry
Michael Boyles Athletic Training for Sport
Athletic Body in Motion by Gray Cook
I think that Mahler is being humble more than anything else when he says that he doesn't feel "competent" to roll his own.
The OP has a "pretty decent" set up except for the week to week set/rep shcemes. But then maybe he feels that he will respond better to it that way. At any rate it will be a great learning experience for him.
After all that experience who can possibly be more competent than yourself to write your programmes?
The answer is you...you grasshopper you Even the experts you speak of had to learn from someone else. Right?
The fact is there are a few very basic rules to work by. The rest is "baffle them with bullshit".
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedLefty
Maybe that's Mahler's problem -- he's incapable of bullshit.
That would also explain why I've been creating my own programs for years now...
I am having a great time reading this. Truth is, I love to be constantly learning and working my may through the many programs I have done adds that dimension to my lifting. I tend to respond well to the programs of others, because of my fanatic attention to following the plan and consistency in doing so. That, I fear, is one of the reasons that so many people fail at a program and complain that they make no progress. The program is a blueprint for success in most cases. The execution is what makes it happen. My forte is execution, I suppose. Currently, I am doing Wendler's 5-3-1 and making great progress. He allows a lot of leeway in chosing accessory exercises to complement the program, so I am having some fun devising my own. It impresses upon me the fact that as long as you keep the major, multi-joint lifts in your program, all the rest is pretty much icing on the cake.
__________________ In Fitness & Friendship, MAHLER
______________________________ __________________________ There is no light at the end of the tunnel. You carry the light with you.
I am having a great time reading this. Truth is, I love to be constantly learning and working my may through the many programs I have done adds that dimension to my lifting. I tend to respond well to the programs of others, because of my fanatic attention to following the plan and consistency in doing so. That, I fear, is one of the reasons that so many people fail at a program and complain that they make no progress. The program is a blueprint for success in most cases. The execution is what makes it happen. My forte is execution, I suppose. Currently, I am doing Wendler's 5-3-1 and making great progress. He allows a lot of leeway in chosing accessory exercises to complement the program, so I am having some fun devising my own. It impresses upon me the fact that as long as you keep the major, multi-joint lifts in your program, all the rest is pretty much icing on the cake.
Yeah, but have you been asked to model for Abercrombie and Fitch?
IMHO, the bulk of the OPs first post should have been around diet and how he plans to eat and stay on track with his meals. That's where he'll make or break his Abercrombie body. The specific workout is really secondary at that point as long as he hits the basic big movements.
__________________
"Only those who will risk going too far can possibly find out how far one can go." -- T.S. Eliot
"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act, but a habit."-- Aristotle
Even the experts you speak of had to learn from someone else. Right?
Linear Mode
