Systematic Strength

Plenty to read on these slides, so I want expand on them too much in the caption. 🤗

Having personally mishandled athletes on meet day, and also having seen some other egregious examples of meet day handling first hand, I figured this may benefit from the growing IG PL community.

Also, I’ll add this, STOP COACHING TECHNIQUE ON MEET DAY. 🤝

Free educational content bc I have a true passion for this sort of stuff. Hmm- should I be collecting a commission for this?!

While individualizing training for athletes requires a sound understanding of the fundamentals of programming (periodization, progressive overload, technique development, etc), it also requires a degree of critical thinking and creativity. 🧠

Recently, I’ve really had to tap into that creative element of coaching, as the team of athletes I work with has become more diverse. To add to the IG powerlifting space, I figured I’d share some of the less traditional solutions I’ve landed on in recent weeks as I’ve worked through some creative problem solving.

While I don’t think I dove too far into the weeds of powerlifting minutia with this one, I do hope it provides a bit of a nuanced look into some of the finer details of programming that I’ve been exploring with my athletes!

We ❤️ anecdotal evidence

Gaining an understanding of an individual’s training rhythm is one my first goals when I first begin working with an athlete.

This process calls for the assessment of objective training data, as well as the careful consideration of more subjective information, which may be derived from an athlete’s narrative feedback or from conversations with the athlete.

At worst, gaining an understanding of an individual’s ebbs and flows will provide you with a framework to begin program design. And at best, by considering rhythmicity you’ll better understand how to individualize everything from the macrocycle all the way down to the set-rep structures you choose to prescribe each session.

As promised, here’s part 2 of the Powerlifting peaking strategies series, and similar to the previous post, I’ll be discussing strategies to employ during peaking that can reduce fatigue without sacrificing work.

In my previous post, I discussed subtly different ways of reducing fatigue by manipulating the set and rep schemes for different types of lifters. The real takeaway from that post was that, depending on the lifter, you may see a more marked reduction in fatigue by removing work via decreased number of sets or decreased number of reps. Nonetheless, the purpose of today’s post is to cover a more general method of reducing training fatigue to potentiate high output.

On the surface, this strategy relies on manipulating sets and reps to spread work across more sets, ultimately decreasing the average relative intensity of the work being performed. For example, if a lifter was performing a 3x5 @ RPE 7 in the previous block, changing it to a 5x3 @ RPE 5 would keep the absolute intensity the same while significantly reducing the relative intensity. This in turn should decrease the resulting fatigue and create an environment in which more reliable high output can occur.

Oftentimes, I’ll utilize this sort of strategy but will crank up the specificity by spreading rep sets out across multiple singles. For example, in recent meet prep for USPA nats, we switched from 2x2 @ RPE 6, 7 in the block before peaking to 1x1 @ RPE 7, 3x1 @ Cap RPE 6 for his final bench press session of each week. Minus the top single, similar loading was maintained in each protocol, though it likely was a less fatiguing, yet more specific protocol.

⬇️ CONTINUED IN COMMENTS ⬇️

As we enter a busy time of the year for competitions, I feel it’s an appropriate time to bring back this oldie but goodie I posted about a year ago. 🤝

Don’t “increase” your strength by decreasing your standards. 📈📉

I’ve seen far too many powerlifters, at all levels of competition, who steadily decrease their standards over time to provide themselves a sense of progression.

This tendency can occur over any length of time really, with some lifters forcing increases in load within a single session or on a larger scale over the course of a meet prep.

Whether it be cutting depth on squats, short pauses on bench or using straps when not necessary on deads - I guarantee you that every single person reading this post has found themselves decreasing the standards to which they hold themselves to achieve some sense of progression in their training.

With some accountability, this behavior can be easily avoided. Though, if not careful, these behaviors can also become very cyclical, as highlighted in the second slide.

My recommendation, hire a coach who will help minimize these behaviors, while also helping set realistic goals when these tendencies do arise. 👍🏼

The beauty of RPE-based training lies in its autoregulatory nature. That is, utilizing RPE as a guide for load selection allows an athlete to pull back on the bad days and get a bit aggressive on the good ones.

However, more often than not, lifters fail to properly autoregulate. This failure to comply with the autoregulatory piece of RPE arises for a number of reasons, though the two I see the most often are refusal to stray from predetermined goals and inaccurate retrospective RPE ratings.

Both likely stem from our inability to completely reject some of the more traditional teachings of strength training, such as the principles of linear periodization and progressive overload. Meaning, even the lifters who go about training in a very reactive manner still may have a very difficult time not framing their goals around the ideas that we need to progress load to progress strength, and that those progressions should occur in a somewhat predictable manner.

Because of our desire to predictably progress, you’ll often see individuals plan out an entire block’s worth of load selections in advance. And while this is not inherently bad or unacceptable, it does directly violate the notion of autoregulation, and, as such, I would not encourage lifters following a RPE-based plan to do this.

Moreover, many people following RPE-based plans that are more reactive in nature rely on e1RMs to determine block lengths. And while this offers a great advantage to RPE-based responsive programming, it’s also extremely vulnerable to purposeful data manipulation (ie. an athlete logging RPE 6 for a set that was clearly RPE 8-9).

If you’re an athlete and you actually want to benefit from RPE-based training, do your best to leave your dreams at the door every time you step in the gym, don’t lose yourself chasing lofty goals, and be honest with your RPE ratings. At the end of the day, your coach will know when you’re manipulating data to fit your vision of what your training performance looks like - but it’s probably best to try to make your vision for training align with the reality of it.

This is a hard pill to swallow for my peers and I who focus on creating individualized training plans for athletes. 💊

As the slides say, the most logical plan does not inherently equal the most effective plan, and visa-versa for the least logical.

Whether it be the Bulgarian weightlifting team under Abadjiev or the Westside bois under Simmons, there have been a number of incredibly successful coaches who have utilized some very questionable methods with their athletes and gotten results.

And while, because of my biases, it does hurt a little to see less individualized/logical plans work well for athletes, I think it speaks volumes to how impactful creating a culture around a training approach can be.

The unfortunate duality of adopting a more individualized style of programming is this - the plans generally make more sense, but it can be much more difficult to create camaraderie among a group of athletes.

So, if you are a coach who doesn’t dish out cookie cutter protocols, you may need to work extra hard to create a culture among your team of athletes. Nonetheless, with a little creative energy you should be able to do just that, while continuing to provide programming that is tailored to each one of your team member’s unique needs.

While online performance/Powerlifting coaching is an extremely desirable profession, it has its drawbacks just like every other job.

The most notable drawback I’ve noticed is the sort of paradox that exists for online coaches, where the abundant flexibility can actually become the profession’s main pitfall. That is, the extremely flexible nature of online work can easily be mismanaged, leading one to becoming overworked and at risk of experiencing burnout.

To mitigate the chances of this happening, it’s crucial that an online coach sets boundaries for their work. Then, importantly, those boundaries have to actually be respected as best as possible - with violations only occurring when ABSOLUTELY necessary.

As a husband, dog dad, graduate student, grad assistant, and full time online powerlifting coach, setting and respecting boundaries with my work is something that I’m constantly having to work on. And because I’m wearing so many hats in the professional setting at the moment, it’s only fair that the boundaries I set are a bit more relaxed than I’d like them to be. However, once a few of those hats are removed from my head post-2023, I don’t plan on simply adding new ones to fill the empty space they’ll leave. Nope - I just hope to continue growing my online presence while helping some very strong people get stronger.

Anyways, those are just my two cents, and I hope that they’ll help both those who are already in the field as well as those who are considering getting involved. 🍻

Anecdotally, the more engaged an athlete is in their training, the better. Therefore, from the first conversation you have with a prospective athlete, you should be actively working to get an them engaged in their training.

Rapport-building is a huge piece of improving engagement, as the relational component of coaching is one that can carry a lot of weight for lifters (pun absolutely intended).

However, you can also really increase an athlete’s engagement by prompting them to think retro/introspectively about their previous training on an intake form. The prompt I personally use can be seen on the second slide.

There are a few really great reasons to ask these sort of questions early on. First and foremost, the athlete rightfully feels that their input is valued.

Second, you can use that valuable information as relevant historical data that is worth considering when piecing together a training protocol for an athlete.

And last but not least, you’ve planted the seed for a more introspective and present lifter moving forward - both of which are qualities that I’d argue typify the more successful lifters in this sport.

As with most things performance-related, there are many ways to skin a cat when deciding how you want to approach progressive overload across a period of training. 📈

The handful of slides here show several examples of ways you can progress intensity or volume over time. The list certainly isn’t exhaustive, meaning, there are more than likely many approaches that could be added to it. And truthfully, you’re really only limited by the bounds of your own creativity when toying around with these sort of things.

And even as a proponent of heavily individualizing programming, I wouldn’t suggest going too far off the beaten path with progressive overload strategy. One, because it can be a slippery slope that leads to novelty superseding logic. And two, because you want to create a space where an athlete is able to actually sense the progressive overload they’re experiencing. Meaning, an athlete may mistakenly view an overly complex approach as a directionless one.

In practice, the magnitude of a technique change greatly impacts how it should be treated.

That is, generally less time is needed to determine if a smaller change is warranted. For example, you probably don’t need multiple blocks of training to know whether or not something like turning the feet out slightly more on squats, or moving the grip out one finger on bench was a good call. However, you realistically may need a handful of blocks to determine if a bigger change, such as switching to Sumo from Conventional, was a smart one.

Some other examples of big changes that carry big learning curves with them that come to mind are:
• High Bar ↔️ Low Bar Squat.
• Mid-Grip ↔️ Max Width Grip on Bench.
• Mixed Grip ↔️ Hook Grip on Deadlifts.
• Narrow ↔️ Wide Stance on Squat or Deadlift

Importantly, sometimes you’ll make big changes and see immediate results (ie. Big improvements in e1RM or subjectively more advantageous/“efficient” movement). However, more often than not that won’t be the case, especially at higher intensities where there are smaller margins of error.

When that happens, don’t panic. Simply assign a reasonable length of time to assess the technique change’s effect on things, and assess accordingly. If you get to the end of that period and you have not observed appreciable positive outcomes, explore something different or the old technique.

Because you may end up returning to the lifter’s old technique, it may be best to have them continue to perform some volume with that technique to mitigate the chances of experiencing another learning curve if the technique change does not pan out. 🔑

For today’s installment of “No 💩, Sherlock”, we have a friendly reminder that Powerlifters should generally avoid making technique changes late in a meet prep.

And, as obvious as this reminder may seem, Powerlifters REGULARLY make the mistake of introducing technique changes during those last critical weeks of training leading into a competition

These ill advised changes may come for several reasons; though, the most common I’ve seen are:

- The lifter changes technique as a last ditch effort to try to force lifts to live up to unrealistic expectations set earlier in prep.

- The lifter is experiencing technical inconsistencies at near max loads.

- Because of accumulated fatigue, a lifter’s output becomes hyper-volatile, and they use technique changes as a sort of compensatory technique.

Regardless of what’s leading to these changes, some things that may help are:

- Set realistic goals for yourself. Use relevant historical data to guide this goal setting.

- Develop technique early in a prep that is transferable to near max or max effort lifts (check one of my recent posts for more on this).

- Remember that strength vs. the ability to express strength are two separate beast. More on this in a previous post of mine as well - but, just know that the former is a much more resilient than the latter.

Of course, there are times where technique changes are warranted. For example, I strained my adductor around 3 weeks out from my last competition. Fortunately, the discomfort I experienced only occurred when squatting with my typical wider stance. So, I brought my stance in a couple inches each side and voilà, my adductor held up for the remainder of prep. 🪄

Struggling with the first rep of a set is an incredibly common issue Powerlifters face in training. And it’s an unfortunate issue to run into, because our entire competition performance is predicated on our ability to perform Rep 1 really well. 😪

Fortunately, as with anything skill-related, improving your first rep proficiency can be tackled with careful programming changes and technique assessment.

Importantly, outside of the programming and technique strategies I highlighted in these slides, there is also often a mental block that lifters will face before that integral first rep.

And, while the aforementioned recommendations can help quite a bit mentally, at times it really comes down to just beginning to trust that you won’t fall apart under the bar.

And as I always tell my lifters, if you do fall apart on rep 1, have your friends slap a few extra plates on each side so it looks like you died under something impressive. 😮‍💨🪦

Creating an environment where your athlete’s training data is trending positively, while also having that data grouped tightly is ideal.

While, we love to see steep positive trends in e1RM across a block, if those increases are so steep that the athlete’s peak output is miles ahead of their average from the block, then it begs the question “how reliable is this athlete’s data?” Ultimately, this muddies the waters a bit when considering long term trends (ie. the highs and lows may just be outliers).

Read through the slides to see a really cool example of how I’m currently working through this issue with !

We’re hypothesizing that, while the inclusion of washout weeks may manage training sensitivity well, it may also be pulling back from long term progress. That is, while it’s keeping Phil fresh as he strings block together, it may be really dampening output early each block. This essentially has forced him to claw his way back during those first couple weeks, to only see some big sets during the final weeks of each block.

The solution? Well, it’s still to be determined, but we’re trying out some cool stuff with how we approach his deload to see if we can mitigate some of these big ebbs and flows that we’ve observed over the past few months!

To lean on some popular metaphors used to contextualize planet earth’s insignificance in our vast universe, for a Powerlifter, a single training session represents an indistinguishable grain of sand on a beach which is an athlete’s training career.

Now to lean into a more pragmatic narrative, a single training session represents just a brief moment of an athlete’s training career, and therefore, the amount of stock you put into each session should reflect that.

The contextualization on the second slide can serve as an extremely useful reminder on days where an athlete defies their norms. Though importantly, this goes for both exceptionally good and exceptionally bad training days.

Meaning, if an athlete pulls a crazy set out of thin air and their e1RM jumps 20 kg, you should consider that data about as accurate and meaningful as you would the data you’d collect if the opposite occurred.

Anecdotally, I feel that the real take home here is that if you have a terrible day of training, don’t get too hung up on it. And on the flip side, if you have an incredible day of training where measurable output is well above your norm, don’t forget the somewhat transient nature of performance does still exist. Meaning, align your subsequent expectations accordingly.

First, as a Powerlifter, you only need to be very good at singles for a few short windows of time throughout the year. Those windows are when you are approaching a competition and when you compete.

Also, importantly, performing training that includes multiple rep sets, but excludes singles, does not mean you are not becoming more proficient at performing singles.

Admittedly, the utilization of year-round singles may be advantageous for some lifters. But, it offers nothing inherently special when compared to other approaches where diagnostic top sets featuring multiple reps are performed.

It is worth noting that these diagnostic top sets need to be somewhat specific, as the further away from a single you get, the less meaningful and accurate your data becomes. However, if you’re regularly keeping tabs on output on something like a top set of 2-6 reps at a somewhat high RPE (7-9), then you can probably count on that data being accurate and a good predictor of subsequent performance on singles.

To be clear, this isn’t a “death to year-round singles” post. Rather, it’s a reminder that the use of year-round singles is a method that would likely prove to be a uniquely advantageous approach for a very small percentage of the Powerlifting population.

Snow day Double-post 🤩‼️

As a fan of providing fairly static training protocols across a mesocycle, I felt inspired to provide a critique of what’s becoming an increasingly common training strategy. That is, the practice of purposely sandbagging early in a block to leave room for later increases in loading.

On the surface, I am actually a proponent of leaving some room to push numbers into later in a block. However, I strongly believe that grossly under shooting on purpose early in a block is inherently flawed for a number of reasons.

Most notably, this approach assumes that training conditions will remain advantageous throughout the length of a mesocycle - allowing for some great crescendo of performance to occur exactly when you expect it to. And while decreasing training stress early in a block may somewhat increase the likelihood of said crescendo, it certainly does not guarantee it.

Logically, it makes sense to not rip ammonia, play your PR song, and bang your head on a wall for your first top set of a mesocycle. However, I’d argue that doing the opposite, by taking your foot almost entirely off the gas early in a block, is equally as bad for an athlete’s long term progress.

In a recent post, I explained that the use of hyper-potent/less sustainable training protocols may be warranted in certain situations to elicit short term adaptations.

In that post, I used the example of peaking for a powerlifting competition, where turning the dial of specificity up a few notches may be best for an athlete. However, what if utilizing more “aggressive” training prescriptions is actually favorable for an athlete year-round?

If this is the case, it’s important to consider that there is likely an inverse relationship between training dosage and block length. That is, as the aggression of a training dosage increases, the length of a mesocycle may decrease to a similar degree - emphasis on “may”.

I emphasize “may” because it’s always best to be more reactive when determining block length. However, it can also be useful to anticipate the length of a block, especially as you are approaching a meet.

I will reiterate, less aggressive approaches to training may be more sustainable and more productive over a long period of time. However, it’s also important to cater to the athletes who lose interest during a mesocycle quickly or stylistically just prefer more aggressive training.

Just a little food for thought to kick off the first week of the New Year. Again, I hope these posts serve as a conversation starter, so let me know what you think!

It is safe to assume that most Powerlifters, especially the more advanced ones, have been doing at least some things right before seeking guidance from a coach. After all, these lifters would not be standing on such solid ground if they hadn’t been going about things in an at least somewhat thoughtful way.

Whether this be their squat technique, the frequency of their lifts, or any other variable that impacts performance, an athlete coming to you may have already just about hit the nail on the head with their approach.

This is why taking a detailed look at prior programming is absolutely necessary when handling the intake of a new athlete. Furthermore, this is why it’s extremely important to have candid discussion about how an athlete has enjoyed their previous training, as well as discussing what they believe has and hasn’t worked up to that point.

Once you have thoroughly assessed everything during their intake, from basic demographic information to the most minute programming variables, you can begin to make educated assumptions about what changes actually need to occur.

However, if you go through that detailed intake and believe that they already are doing what they should, don’t introduce novelty for the sake of novelty. You may simply join the athlete as more of a guide from the passenger seat on the journey that they’re already on.

Comprehensive guidance towards your unique performance-related goals is only a click away!

Sign up to kick start your strength journey.
https://www.systematic-strength.com/online-coaching

Online programming is a fantastic option for anyone looking to excel in highly competitive athletic settings, anyone simply wishing to improve their health and everyone in between!

With this online coaching you will receive an individualized training protocol, full technique review and feedback, and constant access to a strength and conditioning professional if you have any questions or concerns about your training.

Essentially, for a fraction of the price of in-person training, you will receive a personal trainer at your finger tips!

Follow this link to sign up: https://www.systematic-strength.com/plans-pricing!

Systematic Strength updated their business hours.

Systematic Strength updated their phone number.

One of a handful of blog posts up on the website! Give this a read to see how Systematic Strength lifters saw more results in 2019, while doing less work!

https://www.systematic-strength.com/post/less-is-in-fact-more

Less is, in fact, more. In previous years, I'd almost always ask myself, "What can I add to my athlete's programming to help drive adaptation?" This year, thanks to m