That looks like a 1@8, -12% 5x5 to me.
t. 12 week strength template
Definitely not what I would expect from a WFAC SS-style program…
2 Likes
But he’s doing heavy fahves, not 5@8, so it’s not silly bullshit 
3 Likes
I expect the SS rebuttal would be that Chase is not intermediate at this point, but advanced. I believe the “pale rider” has done his time on the SS-prescribed Texas Method in the past, and Rip has stated that RPE can become useful for a sufficiently advanced trainee. Chase and his coaches may also still deny that RPE is involved in the workout you linked. Those weights may have been determined on a percentage basis ahead of time. We would really be splitting hairs at that point, but it’s still a potential difference.
Now, given that the most recent BBM podcast rejects the Novice/Intermediate/Advanced model of advancement and takes particular issue with the differentiation between Intermediate and Advanced, the operative question (for us) is whether Chase would have been better off switching to this style of programming much earlier. BBM says yes, SS says no.
In related news, it looks like Baker just went on Barbell Logic, presumably to hold the party line. Given that Andy’s programming philosophy has never completely matched that of Rip and SSOC, I’m wondering how many words Reynolds and Hambrick had to put in his mouth. I’m about to go listen and find out.
1 Like
Listened to the podcast. Matt Reynolds spoke more than anyone, but actually thought it was pretty balanced. Interesting to hear them say that the intermediate/advanced distinction isn’t helpful. I like Andy Baker a lot. I think his content is well thought out. Having run GGW twice, his programs work as well.
1 Like
I listend to it and wondered what significant differences SS and BBM were having. It sounded a lot like what Austin and Jordan have been saying.
Weird, huh?
4 Likes
I thought the exact same thing when I saw it yesterday on the IG.
We will almost certainly never know all the details. For now the official explanation is that SS thinks RPE is bullshit for all but the most advanced trainees and BBM thinks it is very useful for almost everyone.
It actually is a pretty big difference, as illustrated by Reynolds being completely unable to say RPE 10 without the phrase “no shit” or “bone on bone” in front of it, as though there is something magical or rare about a set where you couldn’t have done another rep, or that it is somehow difficult to identify such a set. My SSLP involved a handful of failed sets and dozens of sets very near failure. I do not think this is unusual. This means I was already familiar with RPE 9.5/10/10.5 as a newly-minted intermediate.
I was surprised and pleased to hear SSOC admit that it is unclear if a trainee is getting any stronger going from 405x5 to 425x3. At least we seem to agree on that now. However, what they are either unaware of or unwilling to admit is that their insistence on peaking the weight on the bar immediately following novice programming detrains the lifter’s ability to handle the volume they will eventually need. If it were presented as a choice, I suspect not many would choose to take a detour into “voluntary hardship” that does not make them stronger in the short term and that stunts progress in the medium term. Maybe this is what Rip really means when he says “narrowcasting”.
1 Like
As an onlooker, I’ve been very frustrated by this split, I can’t imagine what you guys have felt. Mentors, friends, and colleagues split over legitimate differences in what is, it seems, a field that has had little scientific rigor. I appreciate SS for advocating a scientific approach, but now it seems like it’s moving into an entrenched mentality like all the other lifting movements. I hope BBM does not become a personality based endeavor. For all SS’s critique about religion and hierarchy, their reaction has been laughable.
What I appreciate about you and Jordan, is that you generally don’t bite our heads off if we present a reasonable viewpoint contrary to your own. Unless we are just being dumb. Except for the time on the SS forums when I stupidly said someone should take Test. because their levels were low. I repent of that statement.
Listening to said podcast now.
So unbelievably frustrating to hear almost the exact same points reiterated almost verbatim and agreed to on this.
One important difference that I noticed is that Reynolds, Hambrick and Baker dug in on the “intensity dependent” position for training older folks.
It seemed clear that the recent BBM podcasts were in the background of the discussion–it would nice to see an acknowledgement of that, and some more direct response to points of disagreement. It seems like they don’t want to acknowledge the “debate” (to the extent that there is one), but also can’t help responding to criticisms.
He’s probably rotating a heavy single, triple or fahve before his primary/ heavy squat day. I’m doing the same right now. Except for much less weight. This dude is a monster. He probably has a 700lb squat in his future.
and the last 12 minutes kindof went off the rails.
definitely the last one of those I’ll be listening to.
Yeah I listened to the podcast on the way to work this morning. What I found most interesting was at about the 43 minute mark, when Reynolds started to get into the running it out debate, he freely admitted that this aspect of his programming was only his “opinion” and that he had no data or anything to back it up. I do like Andy a lot, so I’m glad to see that he didn’t change his stance on any topics.
That being said, a lot of people seem to be under the impression that post novice programming is the root of the issue between BBM and SS. I think in all honesty that this is mainly a symptom of the problem. I think it’s becoming increasingly clear that Rip is positioning Reynolds to be the heir apparent to the SS brand. Rip also in the past never had any skin in the game when it came to post novice programming, he focused on novice programming and let the talented army of coaches that he put together do their own thing in regards to post novice programming. However, with SSOC now licensing the SS brand, and with SSOC coaches not being allowed to have their own online programming businesses, as well as being forced to stick to the script for programming choices, lines were drawn that weren’t there in the past. BBM had luckily already built a large following on their own and no longer needed Rip’s platform for exposure. Most of the other SSC’s (including Reynold’s and Andy) don’t quite have enough reach to go fully independent, it would be quite painful on the pocketbooks.
At the end of the day, it is a business. Money rules all in this world, whether we want it to or not. Having separate opinions and debate is healthy, and it eventually leads to the truth (though that process can take years, if not decades). SS once was a community that believed in debate, but once they started collecting $300/month for online post novice coaching it was no longer beneficial to the company to entertain differing opinions. They instead chose to draw a line in the sand and create the SS way of post novice programming. It’s a shame it came to this, but I’m just glad that BBM was able to build up enough following to give those of us that don’t buy into the SS way of post novice programming a new home!
2 Likes
He did the same thing with the press/bench the next day !
1 Like
I have an in-person SSC who’s also an SSOC. I asked them about this, and they said that they aren’t forced to stick to any script for programming choices. Also, I’m pretty sure Andy is not dependent on the SS brand (It hardly even appears on Andy’s website, and he isn’t an SSOC coach). If you subscribe to Andy’s channel you’ll see that the kind of stuff he has people do does not resemble anything talked about on Barbell Logic (other than this most recent episode) and even uses some machine work that Rip would curse. I would give everyone on that episode of Barbell Logic the benefit of the doubt that they were speaking their honest opinion unencumbered by some spectre of Rip floating over their head telling them how to program.
What I don’t follow about their position specifically for older population lifters is that they don’t seem to have a systematic approach for improving work capacity. BBM could do a better job of outlining a specific methodology regarding how to apply a stress and then analyze the effect to determine whether it was too much, and then adjust it over time to build the desired work capacity in older populations. Even so, at least it is clear that there is an idea of a methodology based on individualizing programming to response. The SS elderly population programming is virtually 100% based on appeal to authority without a clear methodology to individualize the program to the vast variation on people between 40 and 100. This really contrasts for me what I have always liked about SS, which is defining a physiological model, and using it to logically justify lifting technique and novice programming. I expect many SSCs do this individualization in real life, not sure why it wouldn’t be espoused as much on the podcast.
BTW I think its really funny how everyone refuses to refer to each other in these podcasts, as Jon La points out. In the BB Logic episode, I actually laughed out loud while listening because Reynolds at one point DOES refer to BBM indirectly, as the anthropomorphized apparition of “Science”. “Science says that…”, etc. I think you have to know you need to think through your message more when you’re positioning yourself on the opposite side of “Science”.
4 Likes
If you read my first paragraph I specifically say that I’m glad Andy did not change his views. So we are in agreement there. But Andy is still dependent on Rips platform for exposure. Andy does have his own website and his own programming business, but virtually all of his clientele come to him from SS. Most people don’t hear about Andy until they get into the SS world. If you look at Andy’s YouTube channel for instance and compare his subscriber and view numbers to BBM for instance, you see the discrepancy. BBM has a much larger reach. They no longer need Rip for exposure in order to get client leads. I’m sure they took a bit of a pay cut at first, but they’ve been growing rapidly, so it won’t take long for them to be in a position where they are generating much more cash independently than they were when they were affiliated with SS (if they’re not there already).
nope, that set of bench he posted looked like a x5@10 . . . spotter felt the need to almost jump in.
Yeah, I doubt it. I’m sure a heavy single followed by volume in the 4-6 rep range is hardly unique to BBM programming.
Shows how poor my morning reading comprehension is, sorry for misinterpreting you. I am assuming you mean all of his online clientele come to him from SS. That’s possible, but what makes you so confident? He’s the co-author of PPST and Barbell Medicine. If the SS brand is so critical to him, I think it is odd that he doesn’t represent it anywhere on his site. I agree his relatively new YouTube channel has a lower number of subscribers but I think its pretty new and doesn’t represent a great benchmark as to his reach. Unless you are privy to something non-public, I think it is very hard to know any numbers related to all this especially when it comes to hard revenue numbers vs. squishier things like social media reach.