Optimal program progression?

[leGDE]

Ok, let's clear all disputes from FB / other venues in this forum:

Which one is the optimal program progression?

#1
Bridge -> Bridge 2 -> Hypertrophy -> HLM -> 12wkst

#2
Bridge -> Bridge 2 -> HLM -> Hypertrophy -> 12wkst

#3
Bridge -> Bridge 2 -> Hypertrophy -> HLM -> Hypertrophy -> 12wkst

#4
Any other combo


Thanks!

[Austin Baraki]

There is no "optimal" template progression. We don't even like that word.

It's not like we have a large-scale randomized trial comparing different template sequences to make confident claims on such things.

There will be a wide variation in response to the programs, which will not always be predictable - some people will respond better to one of the templates or another, and observing your response (or lack thereof) is important here.

[Adam_a]

There is no "optimal" template progression. We don't even like that word.

It's not like we have a large-scale randomized trial comparing different template sequences to make confident claims on such things.

There will be a wide variation in response to the programs, which will not always be predictable - some people will respond better to one of the templates or another, and observing your response (or lack thereof) is important here.

Is there any thoughts toward collecting peoples template logs to do some sort of study on results? Or would this not really tell you anything because of variation in lifters?

[protectedbywookies]

In the BBM newsletters, the classifications for the templates are:

Powerlifting (12 Week Strength), Strengthlifting (12 Week Press), hypertrophy (7 Week Hypertrophy), endurance (7 week Endurance), or general strength (HLM or Bridge 2.0).

I'm guessing the reason that templates sequence doesn't matter because they are not designed to be part of a uniformed, progressive process. They serve a general training goal for a general group of people. You can certainly keep repeating one template as long as it brings you good results, but there are also other options to assist with your main goal to avoid the repeated bout effect and keep training fresh and interesting (relatively).

However, I do have a specific question myself about HLM and Bridge 2.0 that share the same "general strength" category. The description of HLM template in the website shop states: "As far as what’s better, HLM or The Bridge? I don’t really have a preference. I think both can be brutally effective for the right population. Furthermore, I wouldn’t feel comfortable saying one is better than the other, as I think the individual’s preferences will end up dictating the program that works better instead of any specific difference in programming variable(s)." Read between the lines, this paragraph seems to indicate that one of these templates might work better than the other for a certain people. Could you confirm if that was the intention when you developed these templates? Does it mean if someone is not getting optimal results from HLM, assuming correct execution of the program, they can expect to get better results from Bridge 2.0, and vice versa?

[Austin Baraki]

Is there any thoughts toward collecting peoples template logs to do some sort of study on results? Or would this not really tell you anything because of variation in lifters?

This would require a large back-end system to automatically collect the data, as none of us have time to manually go through the logs of everyone who uses our templates. We are currently in discussions with an app developer to see about building an app to help with this sort of thing. If it happens, it's still a ways away. But we are definitely interested in setting up some sort of data collection system that people would actually use.