I'm running the NLP for more than a month now it's been great, made good progress. But I don't see how it's possible to do the program 100% as it's described. E.g. I'm taking pretty much a week off now because I hurt my lower back during a deadlift (my form was bad so my fault). I'm also dealing with some shoulder injury from a while back. Like, maybe if someone does no sports at all and just focuses on NLP and sleeps and eats well and has near perfect form then it's doable... otherwise it's unrealistic. The example is provided in Pragmatic Programming is misleading I think you don't mention it in the book but I'm pretty sure that person had already high PRs from back in the day and it's much easier to get back to those numbers you already did in the past a opposed to totally new PRs... Anyways, SS and NLP has been the best programs I have ever attempted to execute.
im doing it perfectly but im unemployed and devote all my time to it. my advanced novice phase recently began with 320 squat and 365 deadlift. making 5 pound gains on my bench press still at 180 (ive always been weak upper body, but things are clicking now). ive added a bunch of accessories to make it possible. lying tricep extensions, dumbel curls, lat pull downs, fly machine; most recently added behind the neck presses and cable rows. now that i have a light day on advanced novice, i do calves quads and hams at the end of my light day, avoiding anything besides the light squats that touch my lower back (eg seated leg curls instead of prone). going to add abs in soon, then im hitting the whole body directly at somepoint. i also recommend knee sleeves, one powerlifting belt for squat/deadlift/press and another lighter belt for the power cleans, proper foot wear, wrist wraps if you need them and elbow sleeves if you need them. oh and straps so you can deadlift and not worry about grip. the deadlift is a terrible grip trainer anyway. i have yet to use elbow sleeves. the knee sleeves protect you from injuries on the squats, and the belts let you tolerate and prevent higher levels of lower back fatigue. just any gear that can lower fatigue and prevent injury is a must to get max results. i usually spend around 3 hours in the gym, and I dont rest very long between sets either!!! the problem with SS is that its both an EZ-PZ novice program that a senior citizen can do, but also the most back-breaking hardcore torture chamber when pushed to the max. its also impossible to quickly master the movements without a GOOD coach. its deceptively difficult, and a lot of people fail and then b**ch about it. not talking about you. and to be honest with you, after semi-mastering a lot of the movements, i think the blue book is lacking in how it teaches them. what it does teach, is correct for the most part, but it doesnt go into enough detail. and i doubt a SS coach would teach you them very well if thats the source material.
It's kind of obvious that an extremely aggressive form of training like this would be hard, especially if someone can't put 100% into it. It works for everyone but ultimately progress is determined by the factors you described plus about half a dozen other factors. That doesn't make it unrealistic, it just means your mileage may vary.
YNDTP. You don't need to add all that extra stuff on novice LP or even advanced LP. You fail to understand that the blue book is a textbook description of why each movement should be done a certain way. The squat chapter explains why low bar, bend over, toes out, hip drahve, etc. Coaches teach these movements according to the model but they use cues to make people move correctly. What more detail do you think you need from a book that is like one third squat mechanics?
A degree doesn't mean crap. Critical thinking is what we need to be teaching the youth . How to think, not what to think. Also, history is very important. Not the false propaganda liberal professors pass off as history. But the true history of our nation and civilization is very important to know.
History degrees (which are one of the ones Mark ignorantly lambasts in this video) absolutely do teach critical thinking. They teach us how to analyse sources and decide for ourselves how accurate, trustworthy or biased they may be. It's taught me not to immediately believe what I read, and consider things from all angles to make an educated decision on where I think the truth actually lies (pun not intended). I don't appreciate this man telling me that I "don't know logic", purely based on the education I have chosen.
@@alexanderbrown8498 I understand. History was major as well. I believe I benefited greater from my education. I certainly am not the cause of nor do I support the type of thinking or actions that lead to the covid mismanagement.
@@alexanderbrown8498 So how did History Grads come to the conclusion that the ONLY important thing about Jefferson was that he owned slaves? Just because you can think logically does not the profession isn't F#cked.
Rip isn’t quite right about the degree thing. If you take grad-level humanities courses (or even some undergrad if you’re lucky) you do have the opportunity to learn about different ideologies and paradigms of thought that have vied for dominance in academia through the centuries. Whereas those students with science majors are not getting as in-depth on that; they will just be fed the normal neoliberal propaganda in their humanities courses. For the record I have a humanities degree, and I have often regretted not getting a science degree. But I have just as often checked myself and considered that my humanities degree taught me how to sift through BS to find what someone is REALLY saying. I can spot BS from a mile off, simply because you can’t BS a BSer. I think that had I gone the science route I it’s possible I may not have learned how to spot and expose certain ideologies in the things we read and the media we consume. I speak the language, so to speak. For example, a lot of people these days are critical of “the liberal media” but there is more nuance than that. It’s not really liberal, it’s neoliberal to some extent, post-Marxist to some extent, and Third-Worldist to some extent. Believe it or not, a literary criticism course, say, can introduce you to the Marxian strains of thought that influence so much of academia and education these days. And learning how it is actually argued for and expressed and justified is very good practice for making up your own mind about your own principles and values. What we really need is a reconcilience between the humanities (including law, which is actually scientific [see Curt Doolittle's work]) and the hard sciences. We need to kick the hostile invaders out of the institutions that they have infiltrated. And it's not hard to find out who they are. 👃
In other words, it doesn’t matter your degree, EVERYONE is taught to believe what the managerial class is pushing. And frankly, some people cannot be taught to think scientifically. Some people are just better at it and they will question everything anyway, while others may have a science degree (like the ones Rusty mentions working in gov’t) but that’s only because they wanted the credential in order to rise in social status.
Go put your mask on and get boostered again, dummy. Leave us, the unvaxxed, in peace. We don't want your smelly breath in here, so wear a mask and go away.
@@bryanutility9609 If the creativity well of his production has run so dry that he has to put out irrelevant content, at least diversify. Squirt out some on data privacy, agricultural practices, or insurance lobbying... whatever. there's so much more to talk about otther than this dead horse
