I have a question on how to approach training to achieve two disparate goals in approximately one year; (1) Hit 300, 400, 500 in the big 3 and (2) run 3 miles in 19:00.
Quick background. I am in the military and have to run the PFT once a year. Doing well on the PFT is still important for my career, therefore running 3 miles in 19:00 or faster would be ideal. I do not have any plans to compete in powerlifting, but being strong is beneficial when we’re out in the field and I generally enjoy weight training and setting PRs. The 300, 400, 500 goal is a bit arbitrary, since strength is specific, but it is the best objective measuring tool I can think of for improving strength.
Currently. I am in the last month of the endurance template and will hopefully run a 3 mile in ~19:30. My current 1ERM are 270, 330, 435 @BW of 180, waist 33 inches, 6ft. I have been using BBM type of programming exclusively for about a year.
The way I see it, if I want to achieve my goal a year from now I have two ways of approaching my goal.
Option A: slowly gain weight while cycling between hypertrophy and power building type templates and try to maintain running conditioning by running twice a week for 6 months. Then about three months out from PFT run the endurance template until reaching the 19:00 run time.
Option B: slowly gain weight while cycling between power building and endurance template. (I have been doing this option for about a year or so now. The results have been mixed. However, I have not tried to gain weight for a steady period while doing this approach which is probably a big factor).
Is there any evidence that one option is preferred over the other? If not, which option would you recommend?
Thanks for the post and nice job on your results so far
I think strength II or III would be better given that you have 1RM strength goals. Gaining a bit of weight whilst running those templates and sticking to running for your GPP would be my advice. I’d cycle in the endurance template with that.
Thank you for the very quick response. Just to clarify, in this situation you would prefer option B (cycling between endurance and strength focus every two months) rather than option A (focusing on one goal, while maintaining the other goal for an extended period of time)? Can I ask why?
I have always heard that muscle/strength takes longer to build and that endurance/conditioning can be regained at a much faster pace. Is that not the case?
Thank you for your response, I look forward to learning more from this conversation.
Okay, I think I understand. Basically, because I have to develop my current level of endurance and not just maintain it, I will have to constantly cycle between the two templates. The (hopeful) result would be an improvement in either strength and/or endurance (depending on the template) at the end of the cycle while maintaining the other goal. The decision to recommend option B approach also suggests that the idea that conditioning can be gained quickly is an “internet myth.” Is that correct?
Lastly, if we were to modify the hypothetical slightly by replacing the 300, 400, 500 goal with a goal of generally putting on some size. Would your answer change much?
Thank you for recommendations, I really appreciate your advice and look forward to implementing it.
I am not sure where you heard that, but I have heard Mark Rippetoe say it. Basically he said the military should regularly train strength because that takes years to develop and endurance should only be developed when needed because it can be developed quickly, for example the ability to run 3 miles can be developed in a couple months. I do think he is correct that the ability to run 3 miles can be developed in most people who have no endurance training in 3 months, but it fails to consider that running 3 miles in 30 minutes, 22 minutes, 18 minutes, and 15 minutes are four very different things, just like squatting 700 pounds, 500 pounds, 300 pounds, and 200 pounds are four very different things. A runner could say endurance should be trained regularly and strength only when needed because most people can backsquat a barbell equal to their weight within 4 months of training. That is true too. But a 200 pound man squatting 200 pounds isn’t really that impressive. Likewise running 3 miles in 30 minutes is better than most of the general population can do but not that impressive in of itself.
Endurance work is a lot like strength training work. If you are brand new you will get a lot of improvement right away, then your progress will slow down and you’ll have to work pretty hard for gains. And just like strength if you had the fitness once before and lost it, you will regain it much faster than it originally took you to gain it.
Running 3 miles at a 6:30 is a respectable intermediate goal for a runner. A few people with great endurance genetics can do it with very little training (or even no training), but for a person with average genetics, its not something you can train for in 3 months unless you starting that 3 month training block in solid endurance shape.
The idea that conditioning can be gained quickly is consistent with the idea that strength can be gained quickly- both are true for untrained individuals provided you’re talking about low levels of development.
I would have you gain weight slowly if you wanted to get bigger, though the training in the templates should provide a nice hypertrophy stimulus.
If you have an athlete who needs more than 3 days of conditioning training. How would you set up the lifting schedule?
I was thinking of trying;
Day 1 AM: Bench/Dead
Day 1 PM: medium run
Day 2: Press/Squat comp
Day 3: Speed work run
Day 4: Bench variant / Squat variant
Day 5: medium run
Day 6: long recovery run
Day 7: off
Reps and sets would probably follow endurance template progression. Does this look alright?
