File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Why are the deadlifts only 3x5 in 5x5?
>> w/ CSCS + BS in exerc phys
because /fit/ only drinks one flavor of kool-aid.

.stronglifts.

there is no god but OUR GOD and our GOD is best
>> Anonymous
It's 1x5
>> Anonymous
And I'm guessing it's that way because after a while your back begins to round uncontrollably
>> w/ CSCS + BS in exerc phys
>>309637
if that were true, what do you think guys who pull singles (me) think of guys who do reps?

but lord knows there's been enough diesel weasl-ing of lifts at any weight/rep combo

i just love how '5' is the magic number here
>> Anonymous
who told you it was 3x5?

it's 1x5.

the dips and pulls are to failure 3 times(3xF)
>> Anonymous
5x5 IS GOOD FOR BEGINNERS. MOST FAGS THAT COME HERE ARE BEGINNERS. MORE EXPERIENCED FAGS ARE FREE TO EXPERIMENT WITH OTHER WORKOUTS BASED ON WHAT THEY WANT FROM THEIR BODIES.
>> Anonymous
>>309632
And Starting Strength
>> Anonymous
really, for deadlifts, it shouldn't be 5 each time. you should work up to your 2-3 max. you could also work to your single max, but you best be careful, deadlifts will fuck you up if you do it wrong.
>> Anonymous
Reg Park recommended starting deadlifts 5x5.
>> w/ CSCS + BS in exerc phys
>>309680
if you think STRONGLIFTS is even 1% original...wow. if you think STARTING STRENGTH is even 1% original. even more wow. at least Rip mentions that he's just recycling stuff into a more digestible, funnier format than those 70s lifting programs.

protip: subbing in rows for cleans makes you less of a man

to paraphrase the Lord Poliquin, 'nothing truly new AND productive has been done in the world of exercise since 1910'
>> Anonymous
>>309702
sports medicine begs to differ
>> w/ CSCS + BS in exerc phys
>>309708
referring to exercise, as clearly mentioned.

look up any really old school (<1940s) training book/routine and blow your mind. its all the same. that is, if you train like a man and not what Flex/Muscle and Fiction have told you.
>> Anonymous
>>309702
>'nothing truly new AND productive has been done in the world of exercise since 1910'
Right. That's why no Olympic records are broken anymore.
>> w/ CSCS + BS in exerc phys
>>309746
have the NATURE OF THE EXERCISES changed?

or has the $, technique in sport, periodization, and advances in chemistry and nutrition done it?

500lbs is 500lbs and has always been 500lbs.
>> Anonymous
>>309723
sports medicine is clearly in the "world of exercise"
>> Anonymous
>>309752
how is "technique in sport" not part of "nature of the exercise"?

also, "technique in sport" and "periodization" are part of the "world of exercise"

The post at>>309702was clearly making the point that there are no such thing as new innovations on how to train as it attacks stronglifts and starting strength on the basis that they are not original at all

problem is, both programs do more than just "move your arm this way." I know that stronglifts includes periodization.

Now, it may not be original, but that's proof that the original comment wasn't just talking about the "nature of the exercise"
>> w/ CSCS + BS in exerc phys
>>309771
way to totally avoid the discussion at hand and ram home some random tidbit to make yourself look smart.

sports med, the umbrella group of health practictioners that deal with 'athletic' injuries. The lulzy part is still how many sports med Dr.s' will tell you deadlifting is bad for the back and squats should be above parallel.

thanks for playing
>> Anonymous
>>309784
way to ignore all the other criticisms in the thread and pick out the one that lets you, a BS, rip on someone with a higher degree of education

now gtfo my universe and an hero fagit
>> w/ CSCS + BS in exerc phys
I never attacked the 'unoriginal' programs of those 5x5s. my commentary was directed that VERY LITTLE in terms of exercises is "new," hence, unoriginality may be inherently successful as it sticks with what works. my original paraphrase, the one you are getting all what from, was to note that the whole fitness game is recycled and people have been getting strong long before scientists (people like me) ever entered the scene.

and i love the 'for the sake of aruging mentality' you definately belong on 4chan. lol to alterations of the 100m starting stance/stride as part of exercises (rows, presses, squats, Oly lifts, 1 hand overhead any how lifts etc)
>> Anonymous
Do 5x5
then once you have base strength you can fuck around and do your CURLZ FOR DA GHURLZ BRAH!
or watever
but make sure you have your SQUATZ!!!!!
>> Anonymous
>>309820
except your quote said NOTHING, not VERY LITTLE

please be more accurate in the future
>> Anonymous
>>309820
also "exercise" encompasses far more than weightlifting

and yes, I belong on 4chan--I've been on here since 2003 and I plan to an hero on camera in 2012 as the world ends according to the Mayan calendar
>> Anonymous
I tried maxing 10rep Deadlifts today.

FUCK! back pain!

Doing lower reps never gave me back pain.
>> Anonymous
>>310170
i do 3x5 deadlifts and i can lift over 9000 pounds now

i tried 10 reps once and got aids and cancer

strong lifts is the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best the best
>> Anonymous
>>310172

3x5 = 3 sets of 5 reps?

Not a troll. I'm just starting out and need some help.
>> Anonymous
>>309820
lies

curlz todays are done very differently from curls back then. 100 years from now they'll do it totally differently. The bars will be made out of adamantium. That is TOTALLY different doooood.

I agree with you btw.