I’ve noticed that in the BBM templates, upper back work is usually programmed in a more generalized GPP fashion as compared to the pressing, squatting, and hinging movements. This makes sense to me for the powerlifting / strengthlifting templates, but for the general S&C templates, this style of programming is a bit confusing to me. As a basic example, what would be wrong with something like the following which provides the same (more sophisticated) programming parameters for the upper back movements as the other lifts?
It would be a big spend of training resources for pulling strength, which may or may not be a good idea. I can’t remember a client or time personally where I ever dedicated that much time to pulling strength.
When you say resources, do you mean time constraints? Or by doing more back volume, that will hamper some physiological processes, and will water down the adaptations for SBD? If you excuse my ignorance, while I can appreciate the interference of press/bench, I can’t see how one additional slot of higher intensity rows can affect it, if introduced gradually.
Anyway, if someone wants to bring their Pendlay row up (in the <8 rep range), what is your current recommendation?
No, I mean energy and related processes for training and recovery. You only have a finite amount of time, energy, and ability to adapt to training.
I think regular training of the row (or chin-up, pull-up, or whatever) will make it go up over time. If you want to dedicate resources to that over SBD, that’s cool. Otherwise, my programming preferences for pulling movements are reflected in the templates.