Archive for February, 2008

Why Strength Training Isn’t Simple

February 4, 2008

On my own I have learned simple is best. Yet what I read said that was all wrong, complex is best.

There are many reasons strength training isn’t simple, but perhaps the biggest is that simple is not worth as much money as complex. Arthur Jones had simple programs, many of today’s espoused guru’s┬áteach a Soviet/Eastern European periodization that factors in the level of the tide, sunrise, moon phase and the orbit of Halley’s comet. You see when you see all the factors that you must consider your are sure to understand why you need to be paying top dollar for this advice and why you should never strike out on your own. Reminds me of lyrics from Pink Floyd’s “Mother”

Momma’s gonna put all of her fears into you.
Momma’s gonna keep you right here under her wing.
She won’t let you fly, but she might let you sing.
Momma’s gonna keep Baby cozy and warm.

In our case Mother is the excessive periodization faction and their followers. If they told you it was as simple as putting more weight on the bar when you can or doing another rep when you can and changing exercises occasionally you would start to question the worth of the coaching you were buying. The more complicated it is, the easier it is for the coach to justify their existance.

Can it be that simple? The resounding answer is yes, not only can it be that simple, it IS that simple. Look for lifting programs from people like Ken Leistner, Matt Brzycki, Kim Wood and the like. These guys practice the KISS (keep it simple, stupid) principle. You won’t see a workout called Double Negative Inverse Loading Periodization Protocol, but you just might find some effective workouts that make you stronger and bigger.