Starting Strength

squats and milk

I do three sets of chin-ups to failure every workout session. Is this a bad idea?

>>41092163
Nah this is good. It'll help keep your shoulders healthy and give you gud bicepts gains. Keep doing it as long as it doesn't interfere with your progress.

Great advice on learning the basic compound lifts.

Good programming ideas for getting stronger as a beginner.

Good diet advice.


99.9% of the people on here who make claims about what SS advises regarding lift, diet and body composition have probably never read a word of it.

>>41092260
My gym doesn't have a good place to do power cleans, would it be worth the money to buy my own barbell and weights to do it at home or can I just substitute some other kind of lift?

>>41092277
>power cleans

That's from an old version of the program. It's since been replaced with barbell rows.

>>41092277
A lot of people replace them with barbell/pendlay rows.

How big of a difference is SS with rows compared to SL 5x5. The only difference at that point is ther number of sets, right?

>>41092284
lol no you dont fucking substitute them.

>>41092284
From the 'anciliary exercises' section of SSBBT 3rd edition:

'First, barbell rows are not a substitute for power cleans. If you use them for this purpose, you have decided to omit a more important exercise in favour of an assistance exercise, an easier movement that does not provide most of the benefits of the more important basic exercise. I say this because of the prevalence of this substitution since the second edition of this book was published. Power cleans are one of the primary constituents of this program, and barbell rows - useful as they may be to intermediate lifters - are not.

>>41092277
You can do power cleans quite easily in the same area you'd do deadlifts. If anyone gets pissy about you doing them, seriously consider finding a different gym. This isn't a joke.

>>41092426
My gym is pretty small and you're supposed to do deadlifts in a rather tight power cage.

>>41092453
do them there then.
put padding mats at the sides and do it.

the bar needs to travel vertically close to your body anyway, it doesnt need much horizontal space.

>>41092426
don't really see the point of PCs for non-athletes

>>41092473
helps posterior chain (DL , Squat).
Pendlay rows don't. Hell even chinups are better to that extent.

>>41092295
They shouldn't (see >>41092426).

SS with rows isn't SS, and SL is a marketing gimmick dreamt up by someone who never touched a weight in his life.

SS is different because it accounts for the body's decreasing ability to adapt to stress - you add more weight in the first couple of weeks, then taper off, then start only adding weight on monday and friday (for the squat at least) then you get to the point where you only do one topset every workout with backoff sets, or you drop from 3 sets of 5 to 3 sets of 3, until you quite simply CAN'T make linear progress from workout to workout.

SL and other knockoff programs simply don't take account of the novice's ability to adapt quickly to relatively little stress. The extra two sets in SL, for instance, are junk volume, and the advice to start with the bar and add 5lbs to every lift right away is absolute fucking garbage that'll mean you artificially limit your progress and also learn how to do the lifts wrong (unless you start out very weak, squatting a set of 5 with the empty bar is a completely different stress to squatting a set of 5 that's actually heavy for you.) Mehdi has even backpedalled over time to try and make SL more like SS because people started complaining that they were stalling stupidly early.

>>41092473
They're the best way to train rate of force development + calling muscle into contraction for max effort, which is great as an accessory to deadlifts for a novice. Obviously if you're not particularly athletic and you can never get your PC above like 33% of your deadlift as you finish the novice phase, that's the time to consider dropping them. It's also okay not to do them if you're older/have chronic injuries that prevent them being done well. In that case, you simply alternate deadlifts with chins.

>>41092490
Can you comment on Reg Parks 5x5 which Arnold done? Is it also a rip off?

>>41092713
Think of it as a beta version. You'll certainly get stronger using it, but with SS you'll get stronger faster and with less fucking around.

Think about it:

When Park did '5x5' he was actually doing 3 work sets across, worked up to in two jumps at about 50% and about 70%.

So it's effectively 3x5 as well.

The calf raises and wrist work are more or less pointless for a novice as you don't need the extra volume to stimulate growth as deadlifts and squats are already giving them more than enough stress. Might as well drop 'em.

And you don't really need rows. Cleans are better for athletic development and generally less tedious.

As for front squats, they're a bit pointless for a novice - especially since squatting correctly is quite difficult to learn and they'll interfere with that learning process. They're an assistance exercise for the clean and jerk used to strengthen the recovery from a clean. Best to leave them till you start doing the olympic lifts in earnest.

Curls are great and everyone does them, but you don't need them if you're also doing weighted chinups, which have the added advantage of working your back in a way that none of the other main lifts do.

As for dips: depending on your starting bodyweight, you may or may not be able to do them correctly, and especially for weaker novices or those with pre-existing shoulder problems, they can cause more problems than they solve.

And then we're back to SS.

I'd say Park's novice program is overall fine, and you will make progress on it, in the same way that you'll make progress on SL, because as a novice you'll make progress doing ANYTHING.

The thing is, if you do SS and you eat right, you'll have a fairly decent set of lifts after 4 months (e.g. press in the mid 100s, power clean in the high 100s to low 200s, bench in the low-mid 200s, squat in the low-mid 300s, and deadlift in the low 400s.) I don't know of any other program that consistently shows those kind of results.

why is is that i can't add weight at every workout anymore?
squat 100kilo
bench 67
ohp 50
dead 125
power clean 57

I can only add like weekly, the smallest plates are 1.25 kilo so its 2.5kilo which is the smallest i can add.

I been doing it for 4-5 months Is this a recovery issue or am i just genetically weak?

>>41093121
The only reason I can think of is bad form and or not eating well enough, check both.

Is Sean10mm stripped 5x5 good for starting or should I switch to SS?

>>41092163
Every workout session might be too much for recovery to catch up with you. SS will suggest you do those as an accessory to bench day prolly.

>>41093121
Do you deload sometimes and do last set amrap?
I think that's what helps me the most when i'm at a plateau.

>>41092074
I read this last week, it's about 90% teaching you how to do 5 lifts correctly, and 10% about programming advice.

I liked the form part, but his programming was a bit odd. He literally tells you to get 6,000 calories a day and to try and drink a gallon of milk every day. He says if you're morbidly obese, maybe it's better to just skip the milk, but still eat like a fucking glutton.

I know you need to eat, but I don't want to gain 40 pounds of fat to get 10 pounds of muscle.

>>41092849
>4 months of SS will result in lifts around 1/2/3/4
lol. Sure thing bud

>>41093121
You adapt much better to increases stresses when you're starting out. After a while you lose that ability and you increase weights with less frequency. And,
>>41093333
Disregard this guy

>>41093418
Yeah that sounds retarded, not going that far.

How much do you think you should eat over maintenance to gain muscle but not absolutely blimp out? I'm okay with some fat, but I don't want to just pack on the pounds.

>>41093347
pls respond friends

>>41093481
Sticky says 500, so I'd stick with that and see how it works out.

I'm still on a major cut though, just trying to lift right now so I don't lose too much.

>>41093481
mark rippetoe himself recommends 400-500 cal surplus for anybody but ultraskeletons or fatfucks

>>41093529
He says that in Q&A sessions, but in SS, he literally tells you 6000 calories and a gallon of milk a day.

>>41092270

Nah the diet advice is shitty
He recommends far too many calories for anyone who dosen't want to be a fat powerlifter

Solid advice otherwise tho

>>41092074
You're going to get fat

>>41093538
he sure doesn't

>>41093538
>>41093529
So what the fuck do I do?

>>41093564
the one that isn't going to make you clinically obese

File: starting strength.jpg (2MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4032x3024px

>>41093558
You haven't read the book then you literal faggot.

>>41093576
Is there any benefit at all to doing more than 500 calories over?

File: starting strength 2.jpg (2MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4032x3024px

>>41093604
He says after a few weeks you can cut down to 4000 calories and maybe half a gallon a day.

>>41093564
Read SS, follow the exercise advice, just don't follow the dietary advice.

>>41093418
Maybe try practical programming

>>41093604
>3500-6000 calories, depending on training requirements and body composition

>NAH MAN HE SAYS 6000 AND A GALLON OF MILK PERIOD

>>41093724
I could post the entire chapter if you want that, but I just highlighted 2 sections where he's clearly explaining that most people will need to eat in excess of 3500 calories if they want to make gains, and that unless you're over 25% body fat you should be drinking a gallon of milk a day.

>>41093740
I'd rather not read an entire chapter at a 90 degree angle.

And regardless, sure it's going to add a lot of fat, but it's Starting Strength not Starting Aesthetics.

>>41093347
>Not optimal, but it works
from another thread

>>41093418
that's why you have to read ALSO practical programming!

>>41093529
>>41093538
and still what is considered to be maintenance caloric intake?
all the calculators suck as they absolutely dont' consider the workload required by SS.

>>41093695
You mean like computer programming i know html

>>41094017
If you want a true caloric intake, you need to experiment yourself and see how many calories you can eat without gaining or losing weight.

Calculators are accurate enough, weightlifting burns calories for sure, but usually they're in line with the low level of activity level of calories provided you're lifting ~3 hours a week.

>>41093445
t. didn't do the program

If you take the squat plug out and actually lift you might get somewhere. And yeah, I know, you're 85kgs SHREDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDED at 11% bodyfat and do 3/4/5/6 for 10 sets of 10 on a 2000 calorie a day diet. I bet you're heterosexual, too!

>>41092485
What muscles prevent the hips and lumbar spine from collapsing into flexion during a Pendlay row?
And how in hell is this mechanism in effect during a chinup?

No, the gallon of milk a day is not supposed to be done by everybody. It's for scrawny 140lb manlets so they can get some meat on them you mongs. Read the damn book.