Yeah it's probably good.

John Broz talks about Bulgarian training:

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=121212081

Thread on bodybuilding.com I came across. Pretty interesting stuff and descriptions of actual workouts the Average Broz Gym guys are doing. To be honest I find his arguments pretty convincing. The fact the Bulgarians just crushed the international level for so long helps.

What is your response to his view that there is no such thing as overtraining?

sickest drug program imo

i like his stance on deadlifts:

"slow lifts do not help any athlete in any sport. the fastest athlete is the greatest athlete."

Reading the entire thread now, I see that he means you'll always be able to lift the bar and thus you can always train. It's definitely an interesting thread.

If the point is that whoever can display the most power is the best athlete, sure, that's fine. But taken literally, that phrase is absurd.

The thread and his interview (which I have seen before) are interesting. However, most of the advice is completely ludicrous when applied to rank novices or even intermediates who have average genes. Blah blah there is no such thing as overtraining. Yeah, well no ****ing **** there isn't when the only people who live through that kind of training are the genetically elite.

Additionally, pointing out that Balkan and Soviet teams max BS 17 times a week only lends credence to the genetic advantages elite athletes have, not to mention the cycles of AAS and test they are running to rapidly improve recovery.

Should people man the **** up and train harder? Of course. But a lot of the statements are either flat out wrong (slow lifts do not help any athlete, GTFO) or apply to advanced/elite trainees - not your random bb.com idiot who struggles with squatting three times a week.

I'm sure there is overtraining (as he would agree). Pretty sure slave labor camp workers were overtrained.

I think what he's saying (with some rhetorical flourishes) is that the body can adapt to pretty much anything given enough time and if the stimulus is increased progressively. Which...makes sense to me.

For o-lifts anyway I can definitely see the merit of going heavy-ish everyday (twice a day), if anything for the "skill" aspect.

I probably will experiment at some point with training 6 or 7 days a week. I like the simplicity more than anything (although having a coach would obviously make it a million times more effective).

90% sure his athletes are using the performance enhancers though. It's smart really: compete as little as possible to avoid becoming team members until the last minute and avoid all the testing. Cycle off, and try to coast to the olympics.

I also find his opinion on over training interesting. I like the way he compares it to taking a job that is incredibly physically demanding. It seems like you would get over trained, but eventually you just do it and keep up with everyone.

I was wondering about that.

Training cycles as they relate to baseball and what stresses the prime movers get during a bullpen or skills work is something I am very interested in and trying to make sense of it all. I would very much like to talk to you (Smiley), Jeff, and Thremp over an IM program to discuss these things if we can ever get all of us online at the same time.

I also wonder about his theories that connective tissues repairs itself at a slower rate than muscle bellies and that training 3-4 days a week makes them more prone to injury. I find it hard to believe given what I know about connective tissue injuries in baseball, but I would love to research the matter more.

Hm, I wonder what the analogous Bulgarian training program for pitchers would be like?

AM: O lifts, squat to 1rm
PM: 10 100% fastballs, 50 long toss, rotator cuff work
repeat M-F.
Sat: rest day (Olifts, squat to 1rm AM. rest PM)
Sun: Game day

Heh, I'm only half joking.

I doubt I'd have much to offer to such a discussion. All my training experience has been with rank novices...one can look at my log for a taste of my intermediate programing (non)skills.

Given what Anavar/Winstrol can do for you, it might be tolerable.

But seriously, my biggest concern is figuring out progressive loading of bullpens, long toss, and other work (negligible in terms of stress) and how it fits in with a four-day split routine that most of my athletes favor. The equation changes in a big way when you compare pitchers to position players since the latter is working 95% reactively and thus has higher CNS stress levels (whoops, forgot those don't exist according to Broz and NeuroDoc) while the former has very little reactive training. My suspicions are that pitchers are underworked in training and overworked in-season, but I need to think a lot more about it. Add this to the list of posts I need to make that no one will read.

EDIT: To address your last post, all but one of my trainees are novices.

Mine is all theoretical, not to mention I'm boycotting the modern world until I live in a universe where I don't have to make a decision between 1) I have to walk 15m in 0 degree weather in the dark to take a poop in a toilet that flushes 2) take a poop in a toilet that doesn't flush and build a fire so it will flush. HYAHCHHCHAHHCAHCA

one kid I met in my gym was a college track athlete (my guess was throwing sports) and training the olympic lifts. He said he was training his squats 2x a day 6 days a week. He said it was grueling for about 3weeks before he adapted to it. He was very, very strong at what I would guess was a thick 225-235.

I'm guessing he was on some PDEs.

I'm interested in what kind of advances there will be in training/programming/technology etc 10 years from now, 20 years etc.

I mean, the way they are talking about it, you can get stronger and stronger as long you are willing to train your ass off, over training not being anything legitimate.

Shrug. Maybe. Plenty of clean athletes squat 5-6 times a week at very heavy loads and have no ill effects from it. I believe Broz when he says that squatting that often is doable while something like deadlifts at that frequency would not be possible.

Obviously training the Olympic lifts that frequently is possible because it is not a measure of strength (despite what some in this forum think); rather, it is a display of power. The limiting factor is how densely innervated your motor units are and how great you are at translating your strength into rapid force development (power) - a great example of a superhuman freak is American Jeff Michels (Broz mentioned him too) who had a clean that was higher than his best FS. We can debate whether or not this is due to ****ty American programming, but the reality is that even if it was "just" equivalent to his best FS, that's very impressive. Most athletes will have a large split and will have no choice but to get stronger, as meaningfully increasing that coefficient is pretty much impossible (same with vertical/broad jump, fastball velocity, 40 time, etc).

His points about the back/shoulders fatiguing quicker than the legs and why the BS is useful should not be missed; they are very important.

So while he makes a ****-ton of good points, his best athletes are likely on drugs and display superior genetics to most people. And while I'm all for a meritocratic stance in theory, the reality is that some people actually cannot work that hard without ****ing themselves right in the balls.

Probably not much, the Bulgarian method was developed in the 70s and 80s I think.

Although who knows. 300kg c&j ftmfw

There probably isn't when you're that roided up and a genetic freak!

thread really inspired me. hammer curls, tricep kickbacks, and lat pulldowns 2x a day, 7 days a week, max effort. see ya at the beach, fellas.

That is just a terribly stupid statement by a very smart guy. Slow lifts will help the vast majority of athletes in the vast majority of sports, including heavy ass weight DL's.

Let's not go super-******o and assume we're trying to move things slow, cuz yeah that is gay. We're trying to move a very heavy ass weight fast and it is moving relatively slow because it is heavy ass.

he's got a point about the DL with respect to his athletes and his training protocol. It's such a CNS kick in the nuts and he's trying to get these kids squatting/snatching/c+j'ing 14 times a week. Plus the stress on the low back which also affects the snatch and c+j. fair points I think.

Fair points for a strong lifter. I don't really think weak people should be focusing more on oly lifts than squats and deadlifts though, but really I cannot even comprehend that insane amount of volume he has his trainees perform so I'll concede that point as well.

Anyways, he said athletes, and the vast majority of people understand that to be someone in a team sport or non-strength sport. I don't understand why all these goddamn strength coaches always say that but mean a strength-sport competitor. Rip does this too and it's stupid. The bolded part of my post is not a good argument against having an athlete deadlift. It is just skipping over a whole lot of fundamental concepts about training and strength, and making a stupid conclusion that because something is done slowly that it will not carryover to things that are not done slowly.

he's back

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDe0fHym7Zw