How might one combine a BMM template with an “emerging strategies” approach, as described by Mike T.?
I’m thinking you could repeat a development microcycle (week one of any BBM template) until it produces a peak in e1RM (which the spreadsheets helpfully track), followed by two microcycles of a steady decline in e1RM. Once you’ve established that you tend to peak at 5 weeks, for example, you could plug in the deload week, before changing things up.
The main difference it seems is that the templates become flexible in terms of length, depending on how long you are able to respond.
I’m thinking this might be a nice way to slowly learn more about how you respond to different training stimuli.
What do you think? Does the protocol make sense? Do you see any good reason to do this?
Many thanks.
I’m thinking you could repeat a development microcycle (week one of any BBM template) until it produces a peak in e1RM (which the spreadsheets helpfully track), followed by two microcycles of a steady decline in e1RM. Once you’ve established that you tend to peak at 5 weeks, for example, you could plug in the deload week, before changing things up.
The main difference it seems is that the templates become flexible in terms of length, depending on how long you are able to respond.
I’m thinking this might be a nice way to slowly learn more about how you respond to different training stimuli.
What do you think? Does the protocol make sense? Do you see any good reason to do this?
Many thanks.
[/QUOTE]
You could try it, sure. Biggest issues with ES and this approach in general are:
- Hard to identify confounders
- Assumption that weekly progress is possible
- Reliability of historical results likely vary in different populations
I think for the right person, they’d be able to do something like this- though likely with more input/feedback than is included in the typical template. I do know that our beginner and CF templates have some element of this though, so it’ll be interesting to see feedback there.