|
|
|
|
|
by grzm
3039 days ago
|
|
I don't think Mark Rippletoe would countenance a program that invariably leads to injury, and would agree that the program needs to be tailored to the individual. If a given individual needs a slower progression to avoid injury, that's the progression they need to follow. In a brief search online, I came across this paragraph: > "Training is the process of changing an athlete’s physical capacity over time. Its specifics depend on the precise task the athlete will perform, when it will be performed, and how often.... The process must also reflect the current state of physical preparation of the athlete: a freshman in high school doesn’t train like a strong, experienced college senior unless his coach is a fool." https://startingstrength.com/article/strength_and_prevention... If you happen to come across something that directly contradicts this, please do share. There’s no guarantee for perfect prevention of injury, but paying close attention to one’s current state of conditioning and adapting training to fit, you’ve got a much better chance of doing so. Injury sucks. I hope you find a regime that fits for you and helps you reach your fitness goals. |
|
That's the crux of the issue. Without such a guarantee, I will never train with barbells again. It boils down to a difference in priorities. You, and Rip, both seem to think soft tissue injury is an acceptable risk in the quest for strength gains. I do not.
Again, look at a table saw. People can use a table saw their entire lives without introducing a body part to a spinning blade. But you can't train with a barbell, with any amount of good form, with any kind of specialized program, with any kind of expertise at hand, and be 100% positive you will avoid injury.