Bookmark this thread:     |
Login  | |
|
RE: FAT PETE'S TRAINING LOG - Apr. 15 2005 9:24:14
| |
|
Little A
Posts: 3491
Joined: Jul. 20 2004
From: England
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Fat Pete
Now the interesting bit, what did you lot in general and Jonnymills in particular, think I meant ? Just thought I'd clear that up.
I always thought it was a £15 deal of cocaine and pcp mix, snorted straight from the wrap, but what do I know?  So it's just plain food? Thats just dull 
_____________________________
Training log kept in A4 diary
| |
|
|
RE: FAT PETE'S TRAINING LOG - Apr. 16 2005 13:11:47
| |
|
jonnymills
Posts: 2414
Joined: Apr. 25 2003
From: Bolton UK
Status: offline
|
It's what everyone round here refers to as coke mate, I thought you were a bit causal about it! Sorry for getting crossed wires...
_____________________________
Training and competition videos
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=MillsyJ
| |
|
|
RE: FAT PETE'S TRAINING LOG - Apr. 16 2005 13:33:47
| |
|
shK
Posts: 3963
Joined: May 17 2004
From: manchester United Kingdom
Status: offline
|
Haha, i thought he meant food, and didn't quite get what everyone meant lol.
_____________________________
My revised Journal, back on the Iron, back where i belong
Click Here
| |
|
|
RE: FAT PETE'S TRAINING LOG - Apr. 16 2005 15:17:37
| |
|
Little A
Posts: 3491
Joined: Jul. 20 2004
From: England
Status: offline
|
Talk about a lucky guess. That'll teach me to be sarcastic in future.
_____________________________
Training log kept in A4 diary
| |
|
|
RE: FAT PETE'S TRAINING LOG - Apr. 18 2005 8:19:15
| |
|
Fat Pete
Posts: 8493
Joined: Aug. 5 2004
From: A pie shop in the North West
Status: offline
|
Saturday 16th April start 11.45
Chest, flat bench
20k x 20
70k x 12
102.5k x 8
127.5k x 5
145k x 3
165k x 1
165k x 1
165k x 1
127.5k x 5
End 12.45
Now this ws fun, the first was slow and steady, the second flew up and the third was hard work, but my arse stayed down on all three. As this now brings me within 5 kilos of my PB then a new PB should be on the cards for Wednesday, just one single at 175 then home. Starting to get giddy already.
So Gentlemen, it would appear that SHK and I live a cleaner, purer lifestyle than Jonnymills and little A, who seemingly are a tad higher up the disreputable ladder. I would never have thought of that. Maybe I would change my board name to Fat Dull Pete. If ever we do meet up on a Saturday afternoon, maybe we should search you before entering the premises LOL.
Squats tonight, then fat Pete's giddy night on Wednesday. Tune in Thursday AM to see what the fat fool does !!!!
| |
|
|
RE: FAT PETE'S TRAINING LOG - Apr. 18 2005 20:02:19
| |
|
jonnymills
Posts: 2414
Joined: Apr. 25 2003
From: Bolton UK
Status: offline
|
Good workout Pete. I'll take it as a compliment being higher than you on the disreputable ladder, although I did sign someone's passport for them last week!
Good luck on Wednesday!
_____________________________
Training and competition videos
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=MillsyJ
| |
|
|
RE: FAT PETE'S TRAINING LOG - Apr. 19 2005 8:12:14
| |
|
Fat Pete
Posts: 8493
Joined: Aug. 5 2004
From: A pie shop in the North West
Status: offline
|
Monday 18th April
Legs, start 16:55
Squat:
70k x 5
70k x 5
120k x 5
160k x 3
200k x 3
235k x 5
235k x 5
235k x 5
235k x 5
235k x 5
End 18:00
Not too bad at all, bloody hard work but it was never in doubt that the five sets would be done. As you can see from the start and finish times, rest periods between sets are down to approx six minutes, whereas on the previous Saturday they were nearer ten, so that is surely something gained. Now three quarters of the way to 240 and still going strong. When I started this back at 220, 240 seemed such a long, long way away, so far that I wasn't sure I would get there, But now, in the final furlong, it doesn't seem that bad. Funny how things change. The moral is just because some long term goal seems out of reach, don't stop trying, still have a go and it really is amazing how things come to be within your grasp. Better stop now - begining to ramble.
| |
|
|
RE: FAT PETE'S TRAINING LOG - Apr. 19 2005 9:05:13
| |
|
Little A
Posts: 3491
Joined: Jul. 20 2004
From: England
Status: offline
|
235 5x5's? Ramble on fat guy. You earned it.
_____________________________
Training log kept in A4 diary
| |
|
|
RE: FAT PETE'S TRAINING LOG - Apr. 21 2005 8:12:45
| |
|
Fat Pete
Posts: 8493
Joined: Aug. 5 2004
From: A pie shop in the North West
Status: offline
|
Wednesday 20th April
Bench, start 16:50
20k x 20
70k x 5
70k x 5
100k x 5
120k x 3
140k x 1
160k x 1
175k x fail
120k x 5
Bollox, bollox, bollox. This was a major shock. Confidence was high, when I unracked it, still high, during descent, still high, powered off the chest, still high and remained high right up to the point where the bar was about a foot off my chest but not getting any higher, getting no lower, but certainly no higher. After what seemed like five minutes but was actually only a few seconds the spotter did absolutely the right thing and took it. Major shock - big disappointment.
17:30 exit gym, muttering into beard and trying not to trip over bottom lip.
After pondering the above I can offer the following, I have only uesd this system on squats before, where it is tremendously effective and where three singles at 265 does equal one at 275, however I squat roughly 100k more than I bench, so maybe for bench three at 167.5 would equal one at 172.5. If you see what i mean, due to the smaller weights maybe the increments should be compressed. Comment are invited.
Next step, monday I shall rewind to 160 for three singles and go again from there, this will restore confidence and allow me take another run at it, it also gives time to consider the point made in the previous paragraph.
Fat Pete nil, 175 kilo bar, one. I thank you for your attention.
| |
|
|
RE: FAT PETE'S TRAINING LOG - Apr. 21 2005 8:18:34
| |
|
veganlifter
Posts: 3976
Joined: Mar. 3 2003
From: Manchester United Kingdom
Status: offline
|
you are up bright and early as well mate
It makes perfect sense what you said. My numbers are nothing to compare to, but nevertheless, even the smallest gains are a product of hard work in bench. Generally speaking the percentage systems differ on squat vs bench in my opinion. In lower percentages the set formulas are too low for bench, and then as the percentages climb higher, they get too tough for bench.
Perhaps i have a defeatist attitude with bench, but i only shoot for 2.5kg increments with my bench PB's ever and i'm chuffed to bits when i make it. Such is life with benching, i hate the bastard 
_____________________________
Meat Free Meat Head
My training log (at www.sugdenbarbell.co.uk)
My Vids
| |
|
|
RE: FAT PETE'S TRAINING LOG - Apr. 21 2005 8:29:17
| |
|
Fat Pete
Posts: 8493
Joined: Aug. 5 2004
From: A pie shop in the North West
Status: offline
|
You and me both VL, you and me both, if only every thing in life was like squats
| |
|
|
RE: FAT PETE'S TRAINING LOG - Apr. 21 2005 12:41:15
| |
|
tokar
Posts: 5940
Joined: Sep. 28 2004
Status: offline
|
I hate benching too (except in those rare and wonderful times when it's going well...) but I do think you have something concerning relation of multiple singles to 1RM on squat/bench. I've always found benching much less predictable than squatting and DLing when it comes to 1RM attempts. I wonder whether a max triple might be easier to gauge 1RM from than 3 singles?
_____________________________
PBs (Aims by end '08)
SQ 190 (220) BP 140 (150) DL 255 (272.5)
http://www.sugdenbarbell.co.uk/forum.php?a=62&page=1
| |
|
|
RE: FAT PETE'S TRAINING LOG - Apr. 21 2005 13:59:48
| |
|
Fat Pete
Posts: 8493
Joined: Aug. 5 2004
From: A pie shop in the North West
Status: offline
|
Tokar: I don't doubt you are right, charts to calculate your 1RM from a set numbers of reps and many, but I have yet to see one that does it from three singles, altough I did once read an article that said it should be a 8 - 10 percent increase. Sadly neither my pecs nor my triceps can read. I'll work it out though, I still reckon a 5k increase (at current weights) should be about right. Thanks for the input, it's nice to get encouragement from a fellow bench hater.
| |
|
|
RE: FAT PETE'S TRAINING LOG - Apr. 21 2005 17:40:26
| |
|
WeeJamesy
Posts: 113
Joined: Mar. 6 2005
From: Belfast (ish)
Status: offline
|
very close Fat Pete, great to hear that the confidence was well up before hand!!!
| |
|
|
RE: FAT PETE'S TRAINING LOG - Apr. 22 2005 13:03:35
| |
|
sootybaby
Posts: 2244
Joined: Nov. 18 2004
Status: offline
|
Fat Pete. Sir, what is your reasoning behind 5*5 style for the squats , but not for bench and dead?
No criticism, just wondering.
Regards
Soots
| |
|
|
RE: FAT PETE'S TRAINING LOG - Apr. 22 2005 17:00:30
| |
|
Fat Pete
Posts: 8493
Joined: Aug. 5 2004
From: A pie shop in the North West
Status: offline
|
Sooty, Fat Pete Sir. I like it, but really, there's no need. The simple fact of the matter is that 5 x 5s are done for as long as it takes to raise the weight by 20 kilos. So the squats started this time at 220 kg and will finish when 240 is reached. The we move to phase two, this is where three singles are done and continue until we can go no higher, no time limit, just keep going until you can go no more. This is the principle for all three lifts but as there is no time limit on each they do go out of sync with each other. So at this moment in time I'm on singles on deadlift and bench and 5 x 5s for squat, in a month of so, it may well be three singles for all three, two months after that, 5 x 5s for bench and singles for squat and deadlift. Each lift has two separate cycles but all three lifts are independent of each other. So at anyone moment I could be at any given point in each cycle, and even I don't know where that is. Hope that covers it for you.
Bye the bye, please feel free to criticize if you wish, I don't mind. I may not take any notice, but I really don't mind. I welcome all comments from MT members, especially those kind enough to read this journal, serious comment is helpful, but the foolish and the frivolous are always welcome, it'll be a sad day when there's no time for fun.
| |
|
|
RE: FAT PETE'S TRAINING LOG - Apr. 22 2005 17:30:02
| |
|
jonnymills
Posts: 2414
Joined: Apr. 25 2003
From: Bolton UK
Status: offline
|
I like your style of training Pete - simple, basic and heavy. I'm just not convinced that 5 x 5 with 240kg will do any more for your squat (1RM) than say 1 set of 5 with 250kg, which you would not be able to repeat for another set?
What do you think of this?
Please don't take offence Pete, you know I love you (and you're 5 stone heavier than me!)
_____________________________
Training and competition videos
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=MillsyJ
| |
|
|
RE: FAT PETE'S TRAINING LOG - Apr. 22 2005 20:39:36
| |
|
veganlifter
Posts: 3976
Joined: Mar. 3 2003
From: Manchester United Kingdom
Status: offline
|
If i may tip in: i think there is so many ways to good gains, but what Streamlined Pete has over many of us, myself included, is the long term plan, determination and patience to build up slowly. Us newbies get exited, do all routines found on the internet, try westside, sheiko, 5x5, abbreviated, all kinds, sometimes making gains, sometimes getting injured. In the longer run very basic routine with a healthy dose of patience would yead bigger gains in a longer run (he says bitterly with an injured back...)
_____________________________
Meat Free Meat Head
My training log (at www.sugdenbarbell.co.uk)
My Vids
| |
|
|
RE: FAT PETE'S TRAINING LOG - Apr. 23 2005 12:17:09
| |
|
Fat Pete
Posts: 8493
Joined: Aug. 5 2004
From: A pie shop in the North West
Status: offline
|
Jon, no offence taken mate, and what you say does make a lot of sense. I don't beleive that 5 x 5 at 240 will give me a better 1RM than 250 x 5 x 1. But I do feel that over a period of weeks the 5 x 5s will create a greater anabolic state, leading to more overall muscle growth ( and therefore more confidence ) than a single set of five would. There is more to be gotten from of 5 x 5 than just a 1RM. They create a better training enviroment, for want of a better turn of phrase, than a single set of five would. And as I don't believe that a single set of five would lead to a better 1RM than 5 x 5 would, you may as well do the 5 x 5s and reap the other benefits as well. I freely admit that I can't prove any of this but I believe it. Also, 5 x 5 has worked tremously well for me over the years so I'm not likely to change it now. Should it ever fail me though, then I'll try something new.
| |
|
|
Printable Version
MP Max from myprotein.co.uk® - Great tasting high quality supplements direct to you from the leading online manufacturer and supplier in the UK. Why pay more?
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread