* I've done both BBR and SS. I prefer BBR but they're both fine places to start. They both basically have you cycle through the staple compound lifts and if you're not already trained this is the best thing you can do for your body. The health benefits of simply doing each compound lift at least once a week plus eating a ton of protein cannot be overstated, they are life changing.
* I'll editorialize here but I feel both BBR and SS are designed for younger, fitter, more hardcore "beginners" than me, especially SS. I was a 40+, out of shape desk jockey and the cadence at which they want you to increase weight was too much for me. Also with these big lifts you NEED to get the technique right or you WILL hurt yourself.
What would you recommend to someone older to start with? I've done SS in my late 20s but I do feel like I'd like to try something new as I get closer to 40 and considering some exercise.
Context, I wfh, am overweight and extremely sedentary. At the moment have been purely working on my diet but exercising is next.
Honestly you should start again with starting strength or a beginner program like it if you haven't been actively training in the last few years. Go slow, start with the bar, let the increases happen until you hit a wall where you need to reassess. Listen to your body. Once you're back to "intermediate", i.e. 6 months to a year of reasonably consistent training, you can transition to a different program or just maintain at 2x a week if you like where you've ended up.
That's in addition to very gradually adding some sort of cardio like walks around the block. Being sedentary is going to be more of a struggle to overcome than strength - you will find that the strength you used to have will come back quickly when you start training again, but as a guy in the exact same boat, the cardiovascular side is the tough part. I am getting strong again really quickly but I am getting winded half way through a strength workout, let alone actually trying to jog.
I wouldn't recommend any changes to it, other than taking it easy if you need to.
The biggest struggle I had when I was totally out of shape was just how tough even a light workout was. It's fine to take it easy and not increase the weights you're lifting aggressively, for instance. Or even to go to the gym twice a week instead of three times. If it's not an easy and fun part of your life you'll fall off the wagon.
Basically you can be a physical wreck at 40, to a degree that a 23 year old guy can't even comprehend. All simply because you didn't exercise.
Just keep showing up regularly, doing the compound lifts SAFELY but heavy enough to tire out your muscles, and eating your protein (100g+ daily, there are formulas to calculate it precisely).
It might take a little longer for us older sedentary guys but everything will come together.
A good personal trainer (or physical therapist if you start hitting issues?) is absolutely worth it if you can get one, one advantage we older guys have is we're more likely to have the spare cash for this.
For my job, I was fit and strong until 28, COVID gym closures and a career change later into wfh tech I was 31 and out of shape and verging on unpleasantly so. I was worried if I could get back into shape easily, but did the below. Only hard part was the discipline tbh, as I started at very low weights/just the bar in some cases.
If you’re familiar with SS, what worked for me was a modified version. I threw out the linear progression and squat 3x times a week goals, and focused on lifting 3x a week come hell or high water and hit 5+ increases if I was able. 30-60 days of that, you’re back at an easy point to decide to get “really fit” or just stay active.
Day 1: squat 3x5, DL 3x10, lunges (the second week, DL 1x5, squat 3x10)
Day 2: bench 3x5, press 3x10, push-ups (swap bench and press same as above week 2)
Day 3: row 3x5, pull-ups, arms/w-e else.
I’m nowhere near when I was strong but my numbers make
Me feel ok about things now, as I know I’m now out of the dangerzone of out of shape AF
I read the critique. It's basically "you don't do enough volume for certain exercises", "you'll end up doing too many squatting and looking funny", "their approach to stall isn't optimal".
It sounds like a www.bodybuilding.com forum rant. Someone arguing why micronized whey is superior to non-micronized. It's ultra-optimization.
If you're someone looking to get started, you're looking to get started, not optimize for a bodybuilding competition. If you like SS, and it gets you actually lifting, then it's good.
If you really get into it, then great! You can continue to refine what you do, read up on all the arguments, try different things. But if you just want a workout that makes you stronger that you can keep doing, then SS works fine.
It reminds me a bit of audio enthusiasts. Somebody wants an amplifier recommendation for a certain budget and people jump in telling them "you'll regret going solid state, the purity of tube amps can't be beat" and the person is like "I just want an amplifier so my kids can watch Disney in surround sound".
And the really good thing about SS is the focus on proper technique. It's more important than how much you lift.
Starting Strength is fine for a beginner. It's not an optimal program, but it's simple, easy to understand, and built on good foundational principles. As an on-ramp into resistance training, it's better than a complex program that'll scare beginners off or burn them out.
It still doesn't change the fact that a suboptimal program which keeps beginners engaged and moving forward is infinitely superior to a more complex one that they fall off of.
This is survivor bias; SS keeps some beginners engaged but there's no count of those who drop off or never start it. I was in the latter group; it was the first program recommended to me, but I was leery of it because I don't have medical insurance and was skeptical about the feasibility of the suggestions based on what I knew about my own body, so I just did nothing about it. When I did start lifting, I started out with light weights and spent months figuring out a program while getting a kinetic understanding of the different muscle groups and how they worked together, spamming volume for a while and gradually adding more weight.
I don't mean that SS is a bad program, it works for lots of people and it's very accessible. But I also think it's way oversold and not magic.
It's definitely not magic, but it's on the 80 side of the 80/20 split, IMO.
It isn't the right starter program for everyone, but then, nothing is. The best program for the beginner is whichever one keeps you consistently showing up and moving forward.
It does actually. The program is so poor that beginners might not even see enough progress that they're put off from working out, because "what's the point if I've been at it for a month or three and still don't have any gains?" That's why it's better to actually pick a good program, one that shows consistent gains as motivation rather than plateauing as a demotivational force.
Other recommended programs like 5/3/1 are not "more complex," that's a false dichotomy. They're just as simple but with different sets of exercises.
This is a very silly argument to be made against a lifting program which has verifiably moved countless people off the couch and into resistance training. The reason people recommend Starting Strength is because it's what successfully got them into lifting.
I train 5/3/1 now, I have for years, I love it, and I absolutely do not recommend it to beginners. I've tried. Their eyes glaze over when you start talking about "training maxes" and "periodization". They get confused and lose whatever sliver of motivation they had. Save the optimization for when they're bought in. Any beginner is gonna make progress on essentially any structured program just due to neuroadaptation. Premature optimization is the root of all evil.
I did SS too in the beginning. I didn't see much progress and that has also been verifiably the case for others too, if you are using anecdotes as your verification process. That SS works is despite its quality, not because of it. And so what? Should we not try to improve programs just because they work in some cases? We don't have to use 5/3/1 then, we can use even the basic beginner routine as recommended on r/fitness, it is pretty good while discarding the problems of SS.
Have you even done SS or read the book, actually end to end?
Comparing 5/3/1 or a reddit post to SS indicates a complete lack of familiarity.
You can use dismissive like survivorship bias all you’d like, but end do the day Rip knows and runs a tier 1 program to get in life shape. It’s very difficult to read SS and execute it as designed and not come to that conclusion.
Sure, but at that point even going for a run is better than Netflix and burgers. Don't strawman the argument, just because SS is ostensibly better doesn't mean it's actually good.
I know reddit loves 5/3/1 and pretends that nothing else exists. Great example of the reddit echo chamber for something that isn't a political topic.
5x5 program got my bench to 275 when I was younger. I think it's fine.
Really after years of trying all these systems the only that will work for sure is getting in the gym consistently and lifting heavy. Everything else is mostly a distraction. Like min/maxing in wow
Yes I have gone through these, started with SS, saw basically no progress, then moved to 5/3/1 and did some other routines over the past several years. At my peak before a recent injury I was at 225 bench, 325 deadlifting and 275 squat.
It is part of r/Fitness, a very reputable resource for fitness as many top weightlifters are there too. The article addresses why it's not a good program and why beginner programs are generally not well designed: https://web.archive.org/web/20200528135350/https://thefitnes...
Ultimately, while I never reached the 200 kg / 440 lb he mentions on the deadlift I got to: (in lbs)
Back Squat 275 2 rm
Front Squat 225 2 rm
Deadlift 375 2 rm
Bench 175 5x5
OHP 135 5x5
C&J 125 1x5
Snatch 105 1x5
With my primary program being SS and then SS like (do the set 5x5 or appropriate at the work weight, advance by appropriate increment). That's the rough master plan at least.
Not advising. Merely sharing my experience. Simplicity of adherence maximized adherence. Visible progress increased adherence.
Just add sledgehammer workout to the routine. It's the foundation of all combat sports. You have your core strength, upper body strength, arm strength well trained.
Arguments there are bullshit - talking about stuff that's completely irrelevant to beginners to make things sound complicated - personal fitness trainer playbook.
If you're a couch potato dev who sits all day and does no physical activity - just doing random shit with your bodyweight or empty bar will get you sore for the first month.
Overloading yourself with pointless movements that are meant to target specific muscle groups is completely irrelevant for the first year. Go to gym - find heavy stuff you can pick up - try not to do anything stupid.
SS is great because it has a low number of movements, volume is irrelevant when you get sore from a barbell squat, learning how to lift is deceptively complicated (breathing/bracing/muscle activation).
The article keeps straw-manning "longterm" this and that - SS is your first year in the gym (or less). By the time you're trough with it, unless you're totally oblivious, you'll pick up on other stuff when you have the time. And you'll have a decent intuition of how to lift, understand recovery implications, consistency in training, and a decent base strength. It's a great base to get you started and have an achievable progression framework that doesn't require much tutoring or time.
I've seen plenty of people get from 0 to nice lifting strength in ~1 year by doing SS. The only thing that's relevant is consistency - if you come in 2-3x a week and do something difficult for an hour for a year - you will see results - it can be total fucking around - you will still get results. It's good to start with SS type exercises because those well defined movements target your entire body, and if you learn to execute them correctly you reduce your chance of injury.
TL;DR - for any newbie out there that's in bad shape and looking to start gym - save yourself time and avoid "optimal muscle development" crowd. None of those arguments apply to you and are completely irrelevant. Don't trust me ? Go to the gym and do 5x5 with an empty bar and see if you're sore after the workout.
I think they are referring to fitness-related advice on Reddit, but, yes, there are a number of quite high quality subreddits out there among the not so great ones.
do you have a phd in history to judge that?
I said I wouldn't trust, I'm sure there is some good resources but they are mixed with bad ones, I just know that r/philosophy is a terrible resource for anyone studying philosophy
I will upvote it and add some context.
* thefitness.wiki is maintained by Reddit's r/fitness and it's a great resource.
* Parent had to use an archive.org link because thefitness.wiki long ago removed the post he linked to.
* I suspect they removed the post because thefitness.wiki now has a 'Basic Beginner Routine' which is similar to Starting Strength, and tells you this is what you should start with. https://thefitness.wiki/routines/r-fitness-basic-beginner-ro...
* I've done both BBR and SS. I prefer BBR but they're both fine places to start. They both basically have you cycle through the staple compound lifts and if you're not already trained this is the best thing you can do for your body. The health benefits of simply doing each compound lift at least once a week plus eating a ton of protein cannot be overstated, they are life changing.
* I'll editorialize here but I feel both BBR and SS are designed for younger, fitter, more hardcore "beginners" than me, especially SS. I was a 40+, out of shape desk jockey and the cadence at which they want you to increase weight was too much for me. Also with these big lifts you NEED to get the technique right or you WILL hurt yourself.