Bench Press

[Thrower74]

FB89, here is a simple yet excellent program for increasing your bench. It will also work for the squat. It was invented by the Russians and since has been used by several coaches looking to gets athletes stronger. I know 4 Olympic athletes that used this program with great success.

Bench Cycle

Weeks

week 1: 5 sets of 10 @ 50% of your 1 rep max
week 2: 10x50%, 8x60%, 8x62.5%, 7x70%, 6x67.5%
week 3: 10x50%, 8x62.6%, 7x65%, 7x67.5%, 5x70%
week 4: 10x50%, 7x65%, 7x70%, 6x72.5%, 5x75%
week 5: 10x50%, 7x72.5%, 6x75%, 5x77.5%, 4x80%
week 6: 10x50%, 6x75%, 6x77.5%, 4x80%, 3x82.5%
week 7: 10x50%, 6x80%, 5x82.5%, 4x85%, 3x87.5%
week 8: 10x50%, 6x75%, 4x85%, 2x90%, 1x105%

This is your primary chest owrk for the week. On your second upper body day hit the incline and do some work to strengthen your back, rotator cuffs and triceps as well.

[NYCmitch25]

Good reply. I did something similar to this when I played Football. It worked well.

[pierced one]

i did the same thing when i was in school. it seemed to work pretty good for the overall strength increase.

[football89]

Thanks alot. I'll try that bench cycle and tell you guys how it goes.

[realconan]

Originally posted by Thrower74
According to your theory if he was packing more mass he would have been faster and his strength gains are irrelevant since he doesn’t run with a barbell in his hands.

OMG that's funny!!:rofl: That would look pretty funny if 100 meter sprinters all ran holding barbells.

[Stonecold54]

Originally posted by Thrower74
SC, I don’t mean to be disrespectful but that is an incorrect statement. If an increase in strength didn't improve performance in an athlete’s given venue of choice then why do so many athletes weight train? I am a high level athlete myself and can say that my increase in strength pays off directly on the field. If your statement were true then people like Charles Poliquin, Christian Thibaudeau, ect would be out of a job. The one thing that we must realize is that mass is not always the almighty goal and can at times be detrimental to an athlete. In fact the body building community is one of the only areas where mass is it the most important aspect. A certain amount of body mass is important to a degree in many sports but strength and dynamics is much more important to football players, baseball players, track and hockey athletes and so on. A good example is to look at the former world record holder in the 100m sprint, Ben Johnson. At 172lbs he had a 605lb back squat and a 420 bench. He ran his fastest while at his strongest. According to your theory if he was packing more mass he would have been faster and his strength gains are irrelevant since he doesn’t run with a barbell in his hands. That theory definitely won’t hold water with anyone in the strength and power community.

Charles poliquin should be out of a job...he really shouldn't be advising people. I stated the reason why people go in the gym...for overall health and increased muscle mass. and as far as the "Community" you are only talking about the one side of it that hasn't had an intelligent update since the 70's. They do flawed studies and then do more studies that quote those studies. i can't get into it all but there are more than enough "Authorties" that go against the orthodox. But whether it is a hundered or a million they can all be wrong. I never said your strength increases wouldn't "help". I am just saying that movements in the gym do not help movements on the field as far as being "explosive". It always strikes a nerve with people when I mention this stuff becuase that is all they have been taught for years and they have been show false data to back up false assumptions.

[Thrower74]

Originally posted by stonecold54
Charles poliquin should be out of a job...he really shouldn't be advising people. I stated the reason why people go in the gym...for overall health and increased muscle mass. and as far as the "Community" you are only talking about the one side of it that hasn't had an intelligent update since the 70's. They do flawed studies and then do more studies that quote those studies. i can't get into it all but there are more than enough "Authorties" that go against the orthodox. But whether it is a hundered or a million they can all be wrong. I never said your strength increases wouldn't "help". I am just saying that movements in the gym do not help movements on the field as far as being "explosive". It always strikes a nerve with people when I mention this stuff becuase that is all they have been taught for years and they have been show false data to back up false assumptions.

Poliquin should be out of a job? I am not sure of the logic behind that sort of statement. Why not axe Tudor Bompa who developed the concept of periodization in 1960’s as well since he was a huge influence on Poliquin’s ideas of training. If all of these coaches are so ill-informed on strength training maybe you should publish a book telling athletes that they are wasting their time if they think that lifting will improve their performance in sport. That will be a hot seller I am sure. I think that the 400+Olympians that Poliquin has coached, (9 of which were medalists at one olympics alone) and the 60 pro hockey and football players that credit there improvement in sport may disagree.

I agree that most people go to the gym to gain better overall health and muscle gain, but we are not talking about regular people here, we are talking about athletes. I know for a fact that Olympic style weight lifting has a direct influence on the CNS and manifests itself in increased power and explosive strength. I am not sure why you are ignorant to this but it has been proven time and time again. If you do some research you will see that there have been many innovations in strength training since the 70’s. Again there is much more to the science of weight lifting than just getting bigger muscles.

[Stonecold54]

Originally posted by Thrower74
Poliquin should be out of a job? I am not sure of the logic behind that sort of statement. Why not axe Tudor Bompa who developed the concept of periodization in 1960’s as well since he was a huge influence on Poliquin’s ideas of training. If all of these coaches are so ill-informed on strength training maybe you should publish a book telling athletes that they are wasting their time if they think that lifting will improve their performance in sport. That will be a hot seller I am sure. I think that the 400+Olympians that Poliquin has coached, (9 of which were medalists at one olympics alone) and the 60 pro hockey and football players that credit there improvement in sport may disagree.

I agree that most people go to the gym to gain better overall health and muscle gain, but we are not talking about regular people here, we are talking about athletes. I know for a fact that Olympic style weight lifting has a direct influence on the CNS and manifests itself in increased power and explosive strength. I am not sure why you are ignorant to this but it has been proven time and time again. If you do some research you will see that there have been many innovations in strength training since the 70’s. Again there is much more to the science of weight lifting than just getting bigger muscles.

there are a lot of books that go against volume and periodization training. Arthur Jones has been writing them since the 70's...mike mentzer has in the 80's Brian Johnston has a nice website with over 20 books from himself and other authors for any information you might want fromt the "other side". www.exercisecertification.com if you are interested. I know that there is more to the science than getting muscles. I don't know why my statements always inflame people. The fact that you have never heard of the "other side" doesn't mean to jump on my shit. I have read both sides...have you? obviously this is not a forum for indepth discussion becuase of the short answer and response. But you should expand your reading and then talk. Its kind of like a religious speaking before discovering real science to explain things. and again he could train every elite athlete in the world but that doesn't mean squat in the morning...elite is exactly that-ELITE. they are far right of the bell curve that will progress no matter what they do.

[shortz]

Originally posted by stonecold54
there are a lot of books that go against volume and periodization training. Arthur Jones has been writing them since the 70's...mike mentzer has in the 80's Brian Johnston has a nice website with over 20 books from himself and other authors for any information you might want fromt the "other side". www.exercisecertification.com if you are interested. I know that there is more to the science than getting muscles. I don't know why my statements always inflame people. The fact that you have never heard of the "other side" doesn't mean to jump on my shit. I have read both sides...have you? obviously this is not a forum for indepth discussion becuase of the short answer and response. But you should expand your reading and then talk. Its kind of like a religious speaking before discovering real science to explain things. and again he could train every elite athlete in the world but that doesn't mean squat in the morning...elite is exactly that-ELITE. they are far right of the bell curve that will progress no matter what they do.

No offense, but you are preaching to someone who has done more reading and training then you. Not sure why you are telling him to do more research. He is VERY well traind and familar with more training methods than I can imagine.

Def gotta agree with thrower on this one. After all, if anyone knows about athletic training, it's a high level athlete.

[bonebreaker]

Your problem may not be anything more complicated than your hand(s) position. Many people who don't know any better keep their hands too close together, thus using more triceps than the more massive pectoral muscles. To hit your pecs in a bench press, your hands should be at least 10" or more outside your shoulders, according to your reach If you haven't been using a wide enough grip, it will feel very weird at first because you haven't been truly training your pecs. Just a thought. BB

[Thrower74]

Originally posted by stonecold54
there are a lot of books that go against volume and periodization training. Arthur Jones has been writing them since the 70's...mike mentzer has in the 80's Brian Johnston has a nice website with over 20 books from himself and other authors for any information you might want fromt the "other side". www.exercisecertification.com if you are interested. I know that there is more to the science than getting muscles. I don't know why my statements always inflame people. The fact that you have never heard of the "other side" doesn't mean to jump on my shit. I have read both sides...have you? obviously this is not a forum for indepth discussion becuase of the short answer and response. But you should expand your reading and then talk. Its kind of like a religious speaking before discovering real science to explain things. and again he could train every elite athlete in the world but that doesn't mean squat in the morning...elite is exactly that-ELITE. they are far right of the bell curve that will progress no matter what they do.

Stonecold I am aware of the other–side and now understand where the anti-Poliquin/Bompa stand is coming from. I am very aware of the Mentrez-aholics and their stead fast dedication to his training methods. He was a successful body builder himself but his methods are like all principles in strength and conditioning in the sense that they fulfill a particular need during an annual periodization cycle. Will his principles produce results? Yes, in certain circumstances. However like all principles in strength and conditioning there must be continuous variation and alteration for continued progress. No one concept in strength and conditioning will work indefinitely for everyone. Even Mentzer used variations in weight training that were not Arthur Jones or HIT related in the later part of his career. Mentzers style of training came at the right time when people where coming out of an era of 2 hour long Schwarzenegger style workouts. The decrease in volume saw instant success as most athletes were over trained. Like exercise physiologists have proven you can’t do any one training system forever, hence the “theory of periodization”. In a sense Mentzer and his HIT style training along with Arthur Jones where simply following the theories of periodization without realizing it by alternating from high volume moderate intensity to low volume high intensity/ absolute failure. On a side not Blood and Guts body building legend Dorian Yates during his last couple of years of training was seeking Charles Poliquin for ART therapy and training programs.

The main reason football players use HIT training is that it is a no-brainer and it’s non-technical and safe. It is the lazy coach’s guide to strength training. It allows you to train masses of people without a lot of technical input. Other than football and bodybuilding HIT training has not found a long term application in any other sport. HIT training should take up no more than one or two cycles out of a 52 week year. It has been proven over the years that as an athlete advances in their chosen field of play, so must they advance in their training style and program design.

[realconan]

Originally posted by stonecold54
I am just saying that movements in the gym do not help movements on the field as far as being "explosive". It always strikes a nerve with people when I mention this stuff becuase that is all they have been taught for years and they have been show false data to back up false assumptions.

Then how do you explain a 6ft 350lb powerlifter dunking a basketball? I saw it with my own eyes too, so don't tell me it's "false data." Powerlifting has everything to do with "explosive." Common sense will tell you that. Besides, in professional sports anything that gives you even the slightest edge is worth it.

Simply stating something that goes against convention doesn't make you a revolutionary. You're also trying to apply body building principles to sports which obviously isn't going to work.

If it aint broke, don't fix it. There's a reason why people have been doing the same thing for years and years...IT WORKS!!

[Bull]

For exploding strength try a 3 sec. pause at the bottom of the rep then explode and drive the weight up as fast as you can . Use a moderately heavy weight. This will create that burst of strength your lookin for.

[Stonecold54]

Originally posted by Thrower74
Stonecold I am aware of the other–side and now understand where the anti-Poliquin/Bompa stand is coming from. I am very aware of the Mentrez-aholics and their stead fast dedication to his training methods. He was a successful body builder himself but his methods are like all principles in strength and conditioning in the sense that they fulfill a particular need during an annual periodization cycle. Will his principles produce results? Yes, in certain circumstances. However like all principles in strength and conditioning there must be continuous variation and alteration for continued progress. No one concept in strength and conditioning will work indefinitely for everyone. Even Mentzer used variations in weight training that were not Arthur Jones or HIT related in the later part of his career. Mentzers style of training came at the right time when people where coming out of an era of 2 hour long Schwarzenegger style workouts. The decrease in volume saw instant success as most athletes were over trained. Like exercise physiologists have proven you can’t do any one training system forever, hence the “theory of periodization”. In a sense Mentzer and his HIT style training along with Arthur Jones where simply following the theories of periodization without realizing it by alternating from high volume moderate intensity to low volume high intensity/ absolute failure. On a side not Blood and Guts body building legend Dorian Yates during his last couple of years of training was seeking Charles Poliquin for ART therapy and training programs.

The main reason football players use HIT training is that it is a no-brainer and it’s non-technical and safe. It is the lazy coach’s guide to strength training. It allows you to train masses of people without a lot of technical input. Other than football and bodybuilding HIT training has not found a long term application in any other sport. HIT training should take up no more than one or two cycles out of a 52 week year. It has been proven over the years that as an athlete advances in their chosen field of play, so must they advance in their training style and program design.

I do agree that jones and mentzer didn't have it right but if you want to read the evovled training that their ideas brought forth then Presrcibed Exercise would be it by Brian Johnston.

http://www.exercisecertification.com...20Position.pdf
http://www.exercisecertification.com...lyometrics.pdf
http://www.exercisecertification.com/books/RxTheory.pdf

[Stonecold54]

Originally posted by realconan
Then how do you explain a 6ft 350lb powerlifter dunking a basketball? I saw it with my own eyes too, so don't tell me it's "false data." Powerlifting has everything to do with "explosive." Common sense will tell you that. Besides, in professional sports anything that gives you even the slightest edge is worth it.

Simply stating something that goes against convention doesn't make you a revolutionary. You're also trying to apply body building principles to sports which obviously isn't going to work.

If it aint broke, don't fix it. There's a reason why people have been doing the same thing for years and years...IT WORKS!!

well then how do you explain me being able to dunk when I was doing slow repetitions with no explosivness but I combined that with PRACTICE almost everyday on takeoff and position for dunking. I agree powerlifting has everything to do with explosivness...that is the sport but it only works for THAT sport. I also agree that the slightest edge in professional sports is needed but I don't see how unsafe training would be an edge? I am not trying to be a revolutionary, lol. I am not trying to apply BB principles I am trying to apply logical thought.