What is else there besides Bulgarian Programming?
 

Hello folks,

In reading lots of stuff on weightlifting programming lately, it seems everyone mentions the bulgarian method. I see very little reference to other "systems"?

What other programming systems are there? Are they used or has everyone gone to some form of bulgarian training at this point? My understanding is that "bulgarian" means spending most of the time on the actual lifts (and relatively few on supplemental lifts) and then varying the percentages. It also seems to mean lots of training sessions/week. Is this approximately right?

Thanks...

howard

Well, Bulgarian method executed as high levels of weightlifting is focused on extremely high frequency lifting... CNS acclimates fairly quickly producing pretty much insane strength gains. From what I've seen high frequency work does produce the fastest and best strength benefits in my own training as well. However, the one major problem I've run into and heard that athletes have run into with high frequency is overuse injuries.

As far as other types of programming there's all different types of periodization. A couple examples off the top of the head is Westside/conjugate method, concurrent, undulated, classical, etc. Here's a good article outlining a lot of the various "forms" of it that have developed.

http://www.elitefts.com/documents/re...e_training.htm

The Weightlifting Encyclopedia (I can't remember the author) has quite a few versions of programing for O lifting. After reading that and looking at Greg's programming I am sticking with Greg. It provides the desired flexibility in doing other stuff that I like.

There's the so called "Russian System", which is simply a pretty normal periodization. Though, I just read and interesting thing written by Mel Siff here (wfs).

That's some interesting insight right there. It is true that the "best" athletes have a tendency for being able to recover better or at least avoid injuries though.. and it does probably have at least something to do with genetics (stronger tendons, more natural test/gh for faster recovery, etc.) at least at the highest levels of competition. But then again.. who's to say that someone who has less ability to recover might inevitably have better biomechanics or the bone structure to put up heavier weight in the end? There's definitely good and bad points.

But I totally agree with the.. blatant need to provide cookie cutter type stuff here. It's pretty busted.

Thanks for both of the links, they were very interesting.


howard