BodyRecomposition Support Forums  

Go Back   BodyRecomposition Support Forums > General information > General training questions
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Unread 01-31-2018, 09:10 AM
jimike jimike is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 116
Default What's the verdict on the updated Reverse Pyramid Training template on leangains?

What do people think of the updated RPT system for intermediate (and advanced) on leangains? https://leangains.com/reverse-pyramid-training-guide/


I'm a middling intermediate in my core lifts (close to 1.7xbw squat, 1.2xbw bench, 2xbw deadlift) and I'm looking for a decent program going forward and I really like how simple it looks to perform and easy to figure out what you should and need to do each workout.

Is this template a good way to get the greater volume intermediates and higher need to progress? He says it can be used for advanced lifters also.

The updated form of RPT has a DEPENDENT form. You can only add weight to all your sets once you finally hit your rep target for SET ONE only (eg. you hit 8 reps if your goal was 6-8 reps for example). This is in contrast to the older INDEPENDENT version where you could add weight to the later sets two and three even if you missed your rep target for set one (therefore couldn't add weight to set one).

What's the verdict? I'm not very skilled at intermediate programming so I don't feel qualified enough to have a verdict really.

Thanks.

Last edited by jimike : 01-31-2018 at 09:12 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Unread 01-31-2018, 09:22 AM
AlphaBettor AlphaBettor is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 633
Default

Hung jury.

I'm not a fan of the low volume approach. There are some people who swear by it. It just depends on a lot of things.

Last edited by AlphaBettor : 01-31-2018 at 09:24 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Unread 01-31-2018, 09:47 AM
w1cked w1cked is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,909
Default

Way back in the day pavel had a routine in his beyond bodybuilding book where you work up to a hard set of 5 then one at 90% and multiple at 80% till form breaks down. If i was bulking id prefer that over 3 sets
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Unread 01-31-2018, 10:23 AM
LightCrow LightCrow is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,014
Default

The new RPT system solves a big problem I had with the original RPT when Leangains was the trendy thing to do. In the old system where I increased everything independently set 1 would usually stall out after a few weeks and sets 2 & 3 would keep creeping up to almost the same weights as set 1. I would deload and have the same issue all over again, leading to a lot of spinning my wheels. It was more a problem with bench vs. squats or deadlifts though. I may try this new RPT again sometime in the future on my next cut, but I prefer straight sets during a mass gaining phase.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Unread 01-31-2018, 10:31 AM
zLeeKo's Avatar
zLeeKo zLeeKo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Belgrade, Serbia
Posts: 730
Default

What happened to good old consistency? Just pick non-retarded program you enjoy most and do it.

Every decent intermediate program is based on same basic principles. So choose one where adherence is best. For example I prefer full body vs upper/lower, because I'm lazy to train legs twice a week and my genetics for lower body are miserable. So I do full body DUP training, because I enjoy it and can adhere for long-term.

And if you're intermediate, you should know how to find volume. Go with Wernborn's rep ranges and don't overthink it.
__________________
"He never had the makings of a varsity athlete"
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Unread 01-31-2018, 10:31 AM
loc loc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 607
Default

I usually use more volume, but I've always been intrigued with this approach. May be something to try when cutting sometime. Even if it isn't "optimal" it's probably one of those things where you can get a majority of the benefits in a fraction of the time. He also lays out some ways to make it more appropriate for bulking, which seems interesting.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Unread 01-31-2018, 11:53 PM
lylemcdonald lylemcdonald is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,171
Default

Protip: this wasn't new the first time he renamed it and it isn't new now.

Poliquin was writing about this before Martin's name was known by anybody. I think Bompa before him. Or Dreschler. Low volume warmup, jump to heaviest weight, pyramid down as needed.

I've talked about warming up and starting with the heaviest set and either staying there if you can or pyramiding down for years and years and years and years.

Training every set to failure, even at low frequency isn't optimal and burns people out over time. Fine, dieting. I've been pushing low volume high intensity since LONG before Martin was a name. Hooray for him for giving it a nifty TLA.

Martin, as usual, is married to the one thing. He says he isn't before saying This is the holy grail of training. Just like IF is the holy grail of dieting.

Even when it isn't. Which is often the case.

tl;dr: whatever. The OP is going to do what he wants and doesn't care what anybody's opinion of a completely NON-NOVEL approach to training is.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Unread 02-01-2018, 07:24 AM
jimike jimike is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 116
Default

Well, I didn't know the history of this method of training to be honest there probably isn't a lot of fairness in who gets credit for what.

I was genuinely curious about whether the newer type of RPT was ok. I really enjoyed that method of training before and it ticks the boxes I like to do,eg. is high intensity, quick and simple but I found I stalled at about the lifting numbers I'm at currently multiple times doing that method so I won't be doing it going forward as a mass gaining program (I am doing it currently for a month long mini-cut but i'll stop after that for sure).

I'm pretty clueless about intermediate programming (aside from bits and pieces)and the interaction of volume, frequency and intensity in training programs so I was hoping to get a feel for what more knowledgeable folk were saying. Lots of intermediate programming templates are quite confusing I find with large 1RM percentage ranges, RPE's and tapering down volume etc. I would love RPT to be a decent option for the mid-intermediate and up as it's soooo simple to implement but I figure it's still not there from the sounds of it.

Yes, I agree IF and RPT is overrated and aren't magic but sometimes it's hard for average joe sort-of-recreational lifters to accurately weigh up the pro's and con's of various programs in comparison to one another.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Unread 02-01-2018, 08:44 AM
farrenator farrenator is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,049
Default

What is so complicated about the GBR? It checks the boxes with volume, intensity, frequency. Take those principles and apply across the different intermediate programs to make sure you aren't doing something silly. Then, pick the program you like best.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Unread 02-01-2018, 09:02 AM
lylemcdonald lylemcdonald is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,171
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimike View Post
Well, I didn't know the history of this method of training to be honest there probably isn't a lot of fairness in who gets credit for what.

I was genuinely curious about whether the newer type of RPT was ok. I really enjoyed that method of training before and it ticks the boxes I like to do,eg. is high intensity, quick and simple but I found I stalled at about the lifting numbers I'm at currently multiple times doing that method so I won't be doing it going forward as a mass gaining program (I am doing it currently for a month long mini-cut but i'll stop after that for sure).

I'm pretty clueless about intermediate programming (aside from bits and pieces)and the interaction of volume, frequency and intensity in training programs so I was hoping to get a feel for what more knowledgeable folk were saying. Lots of intermediate programming templates are quite confusing I find with large 1RM percentage ranges, RPE's and tapering down volume etc. I would love RPT to be a decent option for the mid-intermediate and up as it's soooo simple to implement but I figure it's still not there from the sounds of it.

Yes, I agree IF and RPT is overrated and aren't magic but sometimes it's hard for average joe sort-of-recreational lifters to accurately weigh up the pro's and con's of various programs in comparison to one another.
Who cares. It's a way of training. It works for Martin. Maybe for his successful clients. Try it, don't try it. Low volume, high intensity burns people out. But we all know you're doing whatever you've already decided to do.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.