Three sets over two weeks for a very important lift for developing strength and muscle in your posterior chain is indefensible. Meanwhile, the deadlift volume is so low you may as well not be doing deadlifts at all. This result is so widespread and commonplace that the term “T-Rex Mode” was quite literally coined because of Starting Strength. Your legs will grow more than your entire upper body, and you will look ridiculous for it. Over two weeks, you’re doing 18-30 (SS/SL) sets of squats. Another side effect is that this extremely low volume and frequency does not give you enough practice with those lifts to develop good technique, which is also important for strength.įurther compounding this problem is the fact that you’re doing a ton of squatting in both routines compared to the volume of upper body work.
That is also true for row and chin/pull-up (ie, back) strength. Even setting aside the fact that strength is strongly correlated with muscle size, consider that if your goal is to build a stronger bench/overhead press, you are not doing those lifts enough, or often enough, because the volume and frequency are both indefensibly low. This is not just a problem for those who are focused on building muscle, so don’t think this isn’t relevant for you if your goal is strength and not aesthetics. Here’s the picture we’re painting – If you care about upper body aesthetics, strength, or balance, SS and SL are absolutely terrible choices. This goes likewise with your back – SS itself has no significant back work until you get to “Phase 3” and add chinups, which could be months. And contrary to what the creators of these routines will tell you, the idea that you can stimulate adequate strength and growth in your abs (or core in general) just from doing squats and a single set of deadlifts, or in your arms from minimal sets of rows, bench, and OHP, is so absurd it defies description. The comparison gets even more dismal when you look at volume for biceps (no direct work), back (only rows, only in SL), shoulders (only OHP), and everyone’s favorite – abs (no direct work). Triceps are slightly better because they’re hit by both Bench and OHP, but still low compared to many other routines. This is on average 4.6x the chest volume of SS and 2.8x the chest volume of SL in the same time period.Īre you noticing a pattern? You can repeat this not just with many other routines, but with many other muscles in the upper body as well.
Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Split from Encyclopedia of Modern Bodybuilding, which has 6-8 chest sets (Bench/Incline Bench) in a single workout and 18-24 sets in the course of a week.This is on average 4.5x the volume SS provides and 2.7x the volume SL provides in the same time period. On top of that, depending on your choice of Push accessory work, you can have 10-30 sets of other chest exercises in a week for a total of 26-56. 5/3/1 for Beginners, which has 8 bench press sets in a single workout and 16 per week.This is 3x the chest volume of SS and 2x that of SL in the same time period. An often recommended beginners’ PPL program, which has 6-8 chest sets (Bench/DB Incline Bench) in a single workout and 16 per week.To put this in perspective, compare that to: In total, only 9-15 sets of a chest exercise over two weeks. Let’s quantify how much work your chest is getting in terms we can all understand, like total sets over the course of two weeks. As an example, in both routines, the only exercise that works your chest directly is the Bench Press. We’ll start with the upper body volume problems. There is too much squatting and not enough everything else. Have you heard the term “T-Rex Mode”? It’s what you’ll get – Big lower body, small upper body. In addition, the volume is disproportionately distributed towards your lower body. SS is much more guilty of this than SL, but they’re both pretty low volume overall. Volume is important for muscle growth, especially long term. The total volume is bad and so is how it’s distributed Obviously that’s not a sufficient answer, so let’s talk specifics. Their only possible benefit is their simplicity, which is a need that’s better met by better routines. In short: They aren’t good routines and don’t do what they claim to do for you. Doesn’t this all apply to Phrak’s GSLP too? Why is that recommended instead?.But SS and SL are only meant to be short term programs for a few months, so this isn’t a big deal.Where can I read some comments on Reddit about this?.They neglect all aspects of strength development except one.The way they handle stalls is nonsensical.The total volume is bad and so is how it’s distributed.
0 kommentar(er)
