The Death of Science-Based Lifting

            The act of weight training is governed by a multitude of factors. Of great importance is the biological factor: our physical response to training. Within this factor are multitudes of smaller factors, each contributing to the goal of getting bigger and stronger.  Understanding these small factors and knowing how to manipulate them is how we grow. So we are told by the science-based advocates in the gym community.

            Jeff Nippard, Mike Israetel, Layne Norton, and their ilk are the titans of information within the fitness space. This is because many of them are experts in this realm and provide good information while at the same time being entertaining and skilled communicators. Their content is often helpful, and due to the constant churn of academic publishing, their content is endless. If they are big and strong, it is even better. All it takes is an educated and entertaining individual to read a study and interpret its results in the most helpful way possible.

If Mike can't laugh at this, bless his heart.

            Is that not what we see time and again? A study is published. Its results are echoed across social media by every science-based influencer. The impact or effectiveness of what the study supposedly proves is exaggerated for a while. Then follows a brief period of walking back those claims. Followed by a new cycle of science-based echoes whispering in every gym of what is now optimal. Such is the case of lengthened biased training we see now, and very slow tempo training before it, the now often heckled “functional fitness” era and so many other previous training fads that were in their day dressed in science.

            The logical objection here is that today’s science-based is true whereas bygone cycles of information was “bro-science.” While there is some validity to this objection, do not forget that such bro-science was and still is, misinformation based on misunderstood or misapplied scientific principles. Time under tension, for example, became exaggerated to the point of being the supreme training factor because bodybuilding and personal training industry leaders at the time dramatized its importance. Whether intentional or borne out of science illiteracy it does not matter, for the result is the same: what is heralded as the next scientific breakthrough is claimed to further optimize and therefore quicken your results. Not only that, but refusal to accept this breakthrough and implement its methods is seen as anti-science, and therefore stupid.

            This remains the status quo until the next breakthrough that creates the next cycle of scientific optimization. Parallel to this new cycle runs the death of the old. With enough time that old science becomes forgotten or is exiled to the island of bro-science. This birth-death cycle of science-based training has repeated enough times in my life that the pattern is now seen clearly, knurling the scales of an ouroboros. What was once believed to be of utmost importance is eventually consumed and forgotten by the process of discovering and inventing new things of importance.

This, but a barbell.

            Today, a sense of disenchantment is washing over the lifting community. The cycle of science-based information has quickened. A new study is pumped out and promoted weekly, it seems. The rate of information and exaggeration of its importance are the two primary causes of the disenchantment felt today. It is becoming impossible to keep up with all the newly important factors that govern how our bodies respond to training. Therefore, when such important factors are not carefully practiced and adhered to, and novel factors not learned, understood, and implement, then our training eventually becomes “suboptimal.” Why then waste our time? Why then risk becoming the stupid one in the gym?

            The issue is becoming clearer. It is not science itself that causes this problem. Far from it. Scientific principles, the big things, should always govern our training. No, it is not the science communicators that are the problem, either. Many are qualified experts. Much of their content is valuable. And while there are a few bad apples, and unfortunately some good apples go rotten, I am confident that much science-based information is mostly helpful. Their first problem is overreliance on new information to justify their actions and results. For there will always be new information, such is the nature of science, but there will not always be new results. This divergence is unavoidable. It leads to disrepute.  

Additionally, these kinds of content creators are often merely interpreters, and in many cases, poor ones. Can this blame rest entirely at the foot of the consumer of this information? Not when even the supposed good apples are putting out videos with titles like “Get Abs in x-Days” and “The Perfect Program for x-Muscle.” This content is gimmicky and, in many cases, superficial to the point of misinformation. Nowadays it comes across as a grift. These influencers rely on scientific jargon, a pile of studies, and when applicable, several letters after their name.

This is a grift (According to Science)

The foundation of this problem is materialism and with it the seeking of knowledge (which becomes a thing when we present it as an object, a fact, a datapoint to our reasoning). This is an old problem that existed long before gyms. This problem is cross cultural and ancient. The problem with such an approach is not simply materialism itself. No, the problem is using materialism as the basis for what must start as and always be a story. At its core, this is the battle between how versus why. While how governs why, there is no how without why.

This is not to say that scientific materialism has no place in training. Far from it. All I am saying is that science-based training would serve better as the sidekick than the hero. The whims of the sidekick change so frequently as to detract from the mission. This is always the case. The hero, knowing the faults of their sidekick, puts them in places where they are most valuable and likely to succeed. So too you should place the science-based influencers beside you. Then you can further your story and accomplish your mission, being the hero you are.

As I see it, this is the only viable option when it comes to training longevity and therefore long-term results. Knowing what mechanisms of action are inside the muscle fibers is not going to create six-pack abs. Likewise, big arms do not come about by knowing electromyography data and basing exercise selection entirely on that information. Such will not guarantee 20-inch arms. The only thing that brings us closer to nice abs and big arms is the process itself. While that process does rest on a multitude of scientific principles, those nuances are themselves less important individually, and as a whole, only moderately more important. Does your next workout rely on the next study? Do your results next year rely on data yet published? Of course not.

If only he had the benefits of modern science.

What produces results is the day-to-day creation of our own story. This story, your story, is a process aided by science. But it must have more philosophy and artistry than is commonly espoused today. In fact, it is fair to say that such elements of training are underrated and even hated by the science-based crowed just as much as “anti-science” lifters deemphasize scientific principles in their training. When it comes to getting big and strong, knowing the how is far less important than committing to your why. Does having data in mind make commitment easier by being more confident in your choices? Sure, it can. But understand that choice, for nearly every consumer of science-based content, is more akin to faith than knowledge.

Have faith in Dr. Seedman,
for he too claims to be science-based.

The root word for "confidence" comes from the Latin word "confidentia," which is formed from "con-" meaning "with" and "fidens" meaning "faith."

How much information about training is needed before one calls it enough and takes the leap, confident in what they have learned from the science-based experts? That is individually dependent, of course. So, consider this: if you forgot everything you knew about how the body responds to weight training, would you still go to the gym and lift weights? I would wager that most of you still would. This is because we value training for the process and the results. The story written with each rep. Not what new factoid we learned about muscles.

Even the science-based influencers themselves are beginning to rely on their own story to bolster their information. Story lends credibility just as much as peer review. It sounds false, and sometimes is, but in the gym – such is not the case. Watch how the science-based influencer elevates the importance of a new study by ending videos with “and this is how I will incorporate this new scientific information into my training.” Their story is the capstone. Their commitment to this new information increases its perceived usefulness to the viewer, who then also changes their training to accommodate this new information. As this cycle continues, both the viewer and the science-based influencer commit not to a scientific approach, rather, they have unintentionally committed to a story that is distinctly anti-science.

"One weird trick (SCIENCE!) to make your arms blow-up!"

Let me explain. Science-based influencers create for themselves and their audience a problem that is intrinsic to their worldview. Every new datapoint must be considered and implemented (so long as it is peer reviewed). With an endless stream of new information describing increasingly tiny biological details, which are then incorporated into a new training plan, these lifters develop training Attention Deficit Disorder. When not that, the classic “paralysis by analysis” persists. Because of these things results are stymied. But why? The answer is simple. Always changing how one trains is not a scientific approach. In fact, it is the opposite. Controlling variables, single factor changes, observation over various lengths of time; these things contribute to a scientific training approach. But unfortunately, that is not how science-based lifters nor the influencers themselves train. Because if they do, they fail to incorporate the “new science” fast enough, risking becoming irrelevant and losing value in the market where their story is told.

How much bigger and stronger this year compared to last are the top science-based gym influencers? In prominent cases, not much, or at all. Their competitive results (or lack thereof, due to non-participation) have not improved their professional standing despite the breadth of their training information increasing. A lab cannot not build a physique, but a story can. Even with the very best information and access to equipment, a lifter cannot build a competitive physique or strength without first having a reason to do it, their why. Then, committing to that story. 

New science on the left.
Old science on the right.

This is where highly successful lifters, whether competitive strength athletes or bodybuilders, depart from those who fall short. While science should be incorporated, for it does govern basic biological processes, it does not compel us into the gym like a story does. Becoming who you intend to be, fulfilling your destiny, chasing the impossible, breaking records, being the best of the best… however you frame it, this worldview is what fuels motivation, generating momentum, bringing about results, merely an anecdote to some – but everything to one, you.

For these many reasons I must place myself firmly in the storytelling camp. For that’s all there is, practically speaking. But I will not call every science-based influencer my enemy. No, they are simply lost and will return to the flock after being taught the real value of the why. They must be shown that when they summarize or exaggerate studies to the point of misinformation, they defame themselves and their comrades of the science-based worldview, making them and their storytelling approach less desirable. This is one way that good apples turn bad. Another is presenting a façade of science while not training as they promote. In these cases, performance enhancing drugs are typically being used because steroids are the botox of poor training. We see these things in social media every day.

Sadly, the death of science-based lifting will be self-inflicted. Exaggerated and false claims about studies produce none or at best lackluster results. How long before the next optimization scheme is presented, adopted, then abandoned? When the leaders of this worldview present manure, the stink pushes away their audience. This, coupled with cold-hearted algorithms that favor frequency over honesty, forces the endless churn of increasingly pointless science-based content. The social media machine turns faster and faster, requiring more and more content, which the scientists themselves cannot keep up with. So what then is the science-based influencer to do? Rehash and reemphasize old information while exaggerating their own results. Telling their story, a science-based tall tale.

A star-studded cast. 

 The clashing of these two worldviews, that of science-based lifting and that of storytelling (anecdotal evidence), is not necessary. Unfortunately it seems inevitable. Just this year we saw an “anti-science” brute assault one of the science-based figureheads, Jeff Nippard. Mike Van Wyck shoving Jeff to the ground in a gym was the shot at Fort Sumter, signaling that war between these two worldviews has begun. I do not agree with Mike’s means of communication. For him, it was all he could articulate from his position on the battlefield. Here he was, a soldier of small importance placed in striking distance of an enemy general. I understand this. For Mike’s story, he was compelled to act in that moment. Too bad he was incapable of communicating his position, thus making him the bad guy and Jeff good, forever. But what happened beneath the surface? People started noticing how poorly the science-based camp has been operating.

Now the rift spreads further. Science is under attack at the gym, literally in Jeff’s case. Figuratively in every other case where lifters are seeing Jeff and his comrades walk back one claim after another, thus beginning the process of forgetting them and their content. When science-based influencers forget their misinformation and exaggeration, or deny it altogether, they lose credibility and so battlespace. This is worsened by their need to create content to stay relevant.

Compared to the science-based influencer, the storyteller does not have this problem. Their credibility depends only on their results, and if they are a coach, their clients. This credibility can only be destroyed by dishonesty. Or in Van Wyck’s case, stupidity. Apart from that, an honest storyteller, knowing what scientific information is useful, will properly implement it so that their story is successful. In doing so, science-based training lives on… in the storytellers.

If only he could.

This is the choice these science-based influencers have: Either continue the charade and risk irrelevancy and credibility due to exaggerated and sometimes false claims, while at the same time risk falling to the wayside in the violent churn of the algorithm. Or choose storytelling by emphasizing the philosophy and artistry of their training, bolstered by honest scientific principles.

By choosing the latter, today’s science-based influencer will not only survive, but they will quickly attain even greater authority than currently achieved. Best of all for this camp, they perpetuate genuine science-based lifting without qualm. They tell their story with science as the sidekick. Showing you how to make it your own. As I have tried doing all these years.

May your training bring you to new heights. Happy New Year.

2,000 Days: Maelstrom & Monotony

Please support free content by donating!

PayPal: PayPal.Me

Venmo: @CodyTheFever

Introduction

Over 2,000 days ago I started training without rest days. This means I am working out every day. Nearly all my workouts have been with weights. Few have been bodyweight only, such as when travelling and without gym access. Nearly all my workouts have been guided by my General Gainz training framework. Few have been outside of that framework. The following sections detail two such examples. The first, Maelstrom, is a deadlift program that is unusual because of its high rep, high frequency, low intensity progression. The second, Monotony, is less a program and more a means to complete a quick yet grueling workout. Each of these have helped my training and I am hopeful that the same will be true for you.

Whether or not you complete Maelstrom or try a Monotony inspired workout, I appreciate your readership and wish the very best for your training. May the following concepts at the very least inspire you to try something new, to try harder, to try trying.

A Descent into the Maelstrom

By Edgar Allan Poe

Illustration by Harry Clarke, 1919

Maelstrom
A single set volume progression.

UPDATED COMPENDIUM LINK. FIRST TAB.

Introduction

Maelstrom is a deadlift program. That is the lift it was conceived for. This works well because the deadlift has higher potential for max weights, and with that, potential for work capacity. The deadlift is commonly trained for very few reps per set and for very little overall volume. Maelstrom is not that kind of deadlift program. It is a high frequency, high volume, low intensity (meaning weight on the bar relative to your 1RM) approach.

Maelstrom is the opposite of how the deadlift is commonly trained. So, while it improved my one rep max marginally, what really improved was my stamina, both specific to the deadlift and my fitness generally, as well as the durability and apparent density of my posterior chain. (Cue my gym members asking if I’m cutting, meanwhile I had gained five pounds in a month and my lats were chafing my triceps nearly as bad as my thighs.)

This novel approach was fruitful for me. I believe that for others out there the same will be true. While I enjoy the more traditional way of training deadlift (several sets, some variations, maybe a heavy set here and there), I did not have the time to commit to this lift, but I wanted to train it – so could just one set be enough?

I figured that the deadlift, out of all the other foundational compound lifts, would be the best (and perhaps the only) lift able to progress with so little else to support it other than a single work set per workout. But that’s the hitch… every workout has a single work set of deadlifts.

As designed, Maelstrom is to be run every day. Every day has just one set of deadlifts. Should you want to take days off, that is up to you (early in my first run through I missed three days because I forgot I was supposed to be deadlifting every day; gym owner autopilot). Will you still progress if taking days off? Probably. However, I chose to run this program daily because it fits my goals, abilities, and I have the needed access and equipment. Others have done the same. When taking days off from this program, account for each respective cycle taking longer to complete.

While using this program for the deadlift, other exercises can be used to assist your deadlift progress, such as different vertical and horizontal pulling exercises as well as a variety of leg exercises. Perform those exercises on a day that allows you to recover well enough for the following day, which will also have a single set of deadlifts. With that in mind, the Day 7 workout, having the least amount of deadlift volume, might be a great place for you to put most of your pulling and leg assistance exercises. This is because the following two days, though higher in volume, have very little weight. Therefore, the 1^st and 2^nd days may be good recovery workouts (in the first few weeks). As their cycles progress, they will develop your capacity and help you improve your skill with the deadlift.

However, since the rep progression for the first few days is much faster, those sets will also become challenging. So do not be fixed to a certain amount of accessory work, whether that is the number of exercises or the number of reps, as the overall volume for the deadlift will climb as the weeks progress (especially for the first few days). This will become exhausting. You may find that the lighter days become enough work for your deadlift to progress, and that you do not need the same amount of assistance exercise volume every week. You may also find that you must shift the days when you do assistance exercises. That is fine. What matters most is that you find a way to complete each day’s deadlift set, progress them weekly by adding reps, working through each day’s individual cycle sustainably so that you can add weight when starting a new cycle.

As for me personally, when I ran Maelstrom, I did not include a significant amount of squatting, good mornings, lunges, leg presses, etc. For the most part, I did rows, lat pull downs, ab exercises, and reverse hypers. I reduced my squat frequency from 3x weekly to 2x, then to just once a week as a neared the eighth week of Maelstrom. I found that the deadlifting alone was enough for my posterior chain. I didn’t need a few different deadlift variations anymore. The squatting I did do was not high volume and the intensity was balanced with my recovery (read: I wasn’t trying to chase squat PR’s while working through the Maelstrom progression with my deadlift). The same may be true for you, or not. Your individual skill, work capacity, and recovery should dictate how much other work you do.

Final thoughts: Others have tried this with different lifts, notably bench and overhead press, but did not have positive results. I believe this is because those lifts have much lower threshold weights and since the muscles being trained are smaller, they fatigue faster. So, if you do plan on trying this progression model for another movement besides the deadlift, then you should consider shifting the volume and/or weight progression in such a way that is more suitable to those lifts (read: probably not a 100-rep set).

This is a program that should be used for a single lift at a time. Train the other lifts with a separate program that is not as volume intensive. By doing so, your recovery will not be as challenged. Whatever that other program is, just replace your deadlifting (or choice lift) with this program.

I found it nice not having to do several sets of different posterior chain exercises each week to feel like my deadlift was progressing. Just one deadlift set per day proved enough. The time saved by not doing Romanian deadlifts, good mornings, single leg deadlifts and split squats, and so many other “deadlift accessories” was then budgeted towards doing more arm exercises. This helped me achieve 18” arms. That’s a whole other program and story.

Maelstrom for bicep curls?
No.

My Results

Here is a playlist that has nearly every set I completed when surviving Maelstrom the first time. Sort by date added (oldest) and they should be in order... mostly.  Below are hyperlinks that will take you to particular sets. However, not all sets are linked below. 

I want this section to contextualize my progress clearly. Maelstrom improved my deadlift from a hard 545 with a belt to a hard 600 without a belt. Only the latter is a lifetime personal record.     

I ran Maelstrom for eleven weeks before I tested for a new one rep max. This meant I completed a full cycle of the Day 1 progression, plus a reset of three more weeks for that day. Other days have shorter cycles, so I repeated those progressions several times throughout the period. All of this will make sense in the following sections where I break down the individual days and their respective progression.

            My heaviest no-belt deadlift before running Maelstrom was nearly a decade prior and just 545 pounds. My best pull with a belt is 635 pounds, also completed nearly a decade before running Maelstrom. My heaviest deadlift in the months leading up to completing one full cycle of Maelstrom was 545 pounds, with a belt (and with the hype of being at a deadlift party). That was a very hard single because I was not training the deadlift much before I committed to the Maelstrom progression.

Because Maelstrom is a low intensity, high volume, high frequency approach, I did not deadlift anything more than 445 pounds until the week before I pulled 600, when my curiosity got the best of me, and I completed a 555 one rep max with some pounds left off the bar. That gave me the desire to go for a hard effort 1RM attempt the next week, when I completed my 600-pound PR.

Maelstrom’s sub-maximal intensity approach developed my skill and strength in such a way that I could deadlift frequently without hurting myself. My joints felt good throughout the program. That was never the case when I was training in a more traditional approach for powerlifting; an approach that was agonizing and yielded only a minor gain over what I achieved with Maelstrom (which honestly could be attributed to wearing a belt for my lifetime PR). Considering the two different approaches and the comparable results, I am now keen to the Maelstrom approach that employs volume and frequency rather than intensity and much more time. Even the longest portion of the Maelstrom deadlift set (including warm up sets) took up no more than 15 minutes of my usual workout. Most days it was five minutes or less.

So, not only did it produce a one rep max personal record for me, I also completed many high rep sets that were also PRs. Those lighter weights hurt less and ultimately developed resiliency. This is important because I am nearly 40 years old, have been lifting for close to two decades, and a hard one rep max or even five rep max deadlift takes much more to recover from than it did before. If I could turn back the clock, I would tell 30-year-old me to run Maelstrom instead of chasing heavy rep maxes (which are honestly easier and a lot more fun than doing dozens of reps with a single plate).

Maelstrom is a different kind of difficult. It is one thing to facedown a heavy single that is near your max or perhaps a new lifetime best. Such an effort takes but a few seconds. It is an entirely different sort of thing to facedown a set of 100 reps, knowing full well that the next few minutes is going to becoming increasingly miserable. The end of which isn’t welcomed by cheers and high fives, but stares of disbelief and disgust from other gym members who just witnessed your total masochism and complete abandonment of humanity as you cranked out rep after rep with a meager weight for an eternity.

Summary Graphic

Save this image. Zoom in and read.

Progression Summary and Considerations

            Each day has just one set of deadlifts. Complete all reps in one set. Those reps and the weight used is based on a one rep max (1RM) that you are confident you could achieve any day of the week, rain or shine, fed or starved, poor sleep or good, at the start of the program. Do not use your absolute best 1RM, when peaked, when everything was perfect, and you were your very strongest. When starting Maelstrom, use a reasonable 1RM as the basis for the percentages calculations that define each day’s respective weight.

The weight is repeated each week, adding reps as prescribed. The number of weeks between resets is longer with the lighter days and is shorter for the heavier days. This promotes more sustainable progress with the lighter weight higher rep sets and allows for more rapid weight increases on the lower rep heavier days. 

As a volume deload, the days cycle at their individual rate. Therefore, while Day 1 may still be adding reps, you will reset (and thus deload the volume) on the following days when their cycles finish. For example: Day 1 is an 8-week cycle while Day 5 is a 4-week cycle and Day 7 is a 2-week cycle.

I encourage you to start light because 100 reps of anything is tiresome, especially the deadlift. Though starting percentages are given, adjust those based on your ability. Being conservative at the start is best, as it will allow for more cycles to be completed, thereby building more capacity and strength as you repeat cycles.

A higher daily max will have greater weight increases between cycles. A lower daily max will have smaller weight increases between cycles. A stronger lifter may increase Day 7 by 10 pounds per cycle (2-weeks) and Day 1 by 30 pounds per cycle (8-weeks). Meanwhile, a weaker lifter may increase those days by 2.5 pounds (or micro loading) and 10 pounds, respectively. In any case, you should start with weights that are conservative and increase likewise between cycles. The point is to start with light weights for all days, as that allows for sustainable progress as you repeat cycles.

When repeating cycles, do not increase your “daily max” that each day is calculated by. Instead, just add weight to the previous cycle’s starting point. The only point I would consider retesting the daily max is after a complete run through of Day 1, which is eight weeks. However, if planning on running consecutive cycles of Maelstrom, resist the urge to test a new 1RM; just add the respective percentage to the last cycle’s starting weight. (I fully admit that I did not resist that urge on my first completion of Maelstrom and I did test for a lifetime 1RM. But that is not the course of action I will be taking when I run this program again.)

Weight increases when starting the next cycle are recommended but should not be seen as concrete. Only increase weight as you see fit. Understand that the goal is not merely to add weight, but more importantly, to complete the cycle of adding reps to that single set of deadlifts, thereby building capacity. In the case of choosing not to add weight from one cycle to the next, you may opt to use the same weight when restarting a cycle, then focusing on tempo, position, and other such qualitative metrics as the means of progression.

What I mean by this is, should your Day 1 set in the last two weeks of its cycle take you five minutes and completely wreck you in the process, then maybe the best choice in that scenario is to add very little weight to the next cycle (less than the above graphic prescribes), or add no weight at all; then instead trying to improve the speed of your reps and how little you rest between them. Doing so means completing the 90 and 100 rep sets faster on Day 1 in weeks seven and eight after repeating the cycle at the same or even a lighter weight.

Do not think of that as regression. It is not, so long as you are progressing other aspects of the set (speed, tempo, quality, etc.). Such might be the case with the first two days because their volume climbs steeply. Though very light, you may find your capacity to deadlift for two minutes straight to be limited. Therefore, such capacity should be improved in a following cycle, perhaps by keeping the weight increase small, or repeating the weight, or decreasing it to improve the speed of the set instead of the weight lifted. That option was revealed to me in later cycles of the last few days. It will prove helpful to you before you enter the Maelstrom.

Use the rest/pause method as needed (I typically rested at the top when doing the very light sets). Use straps as needed. The straps will help with the very high rep sets. Use a belt if you want (I chose not to because I wanted to limit my weights).

To recap: The days rotate through their cycles independently. The heavier the day, the faster the cycle, and the faster you add weight. The lighter the day, the longer the cycle, and the slower you add weight – although the reps grow massively. The days progress through their own cycles independently. So, while Day 1 is eight weeks per cycle, you will run through four cycles of the two-week progression that is Day 7. You use the same weight for each day’s respective cycle length, with the week-to-week progression being adding reps as you progress through the cycle. You only add weight when you restart the cycle for an individual day. This is the gist of Maelstrom.

Daily Sets and Cycle Lengths

Each day has just one set. That set progresses weekly by adding a certain number of reps. Each day has a certain number of weeks per cycle. When the last week is reached and the total number of reps is completed, reset with a heavier weight at the starting reps (the lowest of each respective day).

Each cycle reset executes a volume deload. This is when you add weight and complete another cycle in the Maelstrom. Some resets are only a handful of reps or less while others are dozens of reps. This is determined by the day that is starting another cycle in the Maelstrom.

The following section uses weights based on an example daily 1RM of 500 pounds. This is where I started. The videos linked are just a sampling of all the videos I took while I was surviving Maelstrom. I recorded nearly every set. These videos are in this playlist. 

Day 1: 125 lbs. x 30 reps (Remember, this weight is based on my daily 1RM of 500 lbs.)

            Start the first cycle at 25% of your daily 1RM weight.

Add 10 reps each week.

            When this day reaches a set of 100 reps, add weight, and reset back to 30 reps. This functions as a volume deload.

            Week 1: 30 reps

            Week 2: 40 reps

            Week 3: 50 reps

            Week 4: 60 reps

            Week 5: 70 reps

            Week 6: 80 reps

            Week 7: 90 reps

            Week 8: 100 reps

            For the cycle back to 30 reps, increase the weight by 10% to 12.5% of the weight previously completed for the 100-rep set. In the case of using 125 lbs., that would be roughly a 15- to 20-pound weight increase.

Day 2: 175 lbs. x 20 reps

            Start the first cycle at 35% of your daily 1RM weight.

Add 8 reps each week.

            When this day reaches 68 reps, add weight, reset back to 20 reps.

            Week 1: 20 reps

            Week 2: 28 reps

            Week 3: 36 reps

            Week 4: 44 reps

            Week 5: 52 reps

            Week 6: 60 reps

            Week 7: 68 reps

For the cycle back to 20 reps, increase the weight by 7% to 9% of the weight previously completed for the 68-rep set. In the case of using 175 lbs., that would be roughly a 15- to 20-pound weight increase.

Day 3: 225 lbs. x 15 reps

            Start the first cycle at 45% of your daily 1RM weight.        

Add 6 reps each week.

            When this day reaches 45 reps, add weight, reset back to 15 reps.

Week 1: 15 reps

            Week 2: 21 reps

            Week 3: 27 reps

            Week 4: 33 reps

            Week 5: 39 reps

            Week 6: 45 reps 

For the cycle back to 15 reps, increase the weight by 5% to 7% of the weight previously completed for the 45-rep set. In the case of using 225 lbs., that would be roughly a 10- to 15-pound weight increase.

Day 4: 275 lbs. x 10 reps

            Start the first cycle at 55% of your daily 1RM weight.        

            Add 4 reps each week.

            When this day reaches 26 reps, add weight, reset back to 10 reps.

Week 1: 10 reps

            Week 2: 14 reps

            Week 3: 18 reps

            Week 4: 22 reps

            Week5: 26 reps

For the cycle back to 10 reps, increase the weight by 3% to 5% of the weight previously completed for the 26-rep set. In the case of using 300 lbs., that would be roughly a 10- to 15-pound weight increase.

Day 5: 325 lbs. x 5 reps

            Start the first cycle at 65% of your daily 1RM weight.        

            Add 3 reps each week.

When this day reaches 14 reps, add weight, reset back to 5 reps.

Week 1: 5 reps

            Week 2: 8 reps

            Week 3: 11 reps

            Week 4: 14 reps

For the cycle back to 5 reps, increase the weight by 2% to 3.5% of the weight previously completed for the 14-rep set. In the case of using 325 lbs., that would be roughly a 5- to 10-pound weight increase.

Day 6: 375 lbs. x 3 reps

            Start the first cycle at 75% of your daily 1RM weight.        

            Add 2 reps each week.

When this day reaches 7 reps, add weight, reset back to 3 reps.

Week 1: 3 reps

            Week 2: 5 reps

            Week 3: 7 reps

For the cycle back to 3 reps, increase the weight by 1.5% to 2.5% of the weight previously completed for the 7-rep set. In the case of using 375 lbs., that would be roughly a 5- to 10-pound weight increase.

Day 7: 425 lbs. x 2 reps

            Start the first cycle at 85% of your daily 1RM weight.        

            Add 1 rep each week.

When this day reaches 3 reps, add weight, reset back to 2 reps.

Week 1: 2 reps

            Week 2: 3 reps

For the cycle back to 2 reps, increase the weight by 1% to 2% of the weight previously completed for the 3-rep set. In the case of using 425 lbs., that would be roughly a 5- to 10-pound weight increase.

Reminder: Be conservative with your weight increases between cycles! For example, I added 15 pounds when repeating Day 1 and 5 pounds when repeating the Day 7 cycle.

Cycle Lengths

            Each day has its respective cycle length. This is how many weeks you will be using the same weight while adding reps to the single set of deadlifts on that day. Independent cycle lengths also function as volume deloads which aid the overall recovery process. Such cycle lengths also allow for more rapid increases in weight in the last three days (which is why their weight increases are less between cycles compared to the first few days that have longer cycles).

Day 1	8 Weeks
Day 2	7 Weeks
Day 3	6 Weeks
Day 4	5 Weeks
Day 5	4 Weeks
Day 6	3 Weeks
Day 7	2 Weeks

These are the standard cycle lengths when training the deadlift every day. If you are taking days off from deadlifting, these cycle lengths will be extended. Though perhaps intimidating at first glance, know that your work capacity will increase, and you may find a set of 50, 80, or even 100 reps to not be as taxing as first imagined. This was the case for me when I started my first run through Maelstrom. Thinking of doing 125x100 intimidated me. But after I completed it, I sat down (winded) and realized it wasn’t as hard as I made it out to be, and that I could in fact add weight and again work towards a 100-rep set.

When taking days off from the deadlift sets just remember that you will repeat a weight for the respective number of weeks. So, for Day 1, that is using the same weight for 8 workouts, adding 10 reps each workout, working from 30 reps to 100 reps. When spacing out the deadlift sets by taking rest days those 8 workouts will last more than 8 weeks.

Weight is added and you descend further,
rep after rep, as you spin round the walls of the maelstrom.

Starting Weights and Projected Weight Increases

Increase weight from cycle to cycle in a sustainable manner. You may find yourself doing 10-to-20-pound increases between cycles for the first four days, and potentially increases of 5 to 10 pounds for the last three days (or micro loading day 7 depending on the weight of your initial daily 1RM that each percentage is based on); this is because the later days are heavier, and their cycle lengths are shorter. Conservative increases are best because they promote successful completion of each cycle, resulting in more cycles being completed, and therefore more weight in the long run. Think long term! Do not rush to add heaps of weight to the 6^th and 7^th days as their cycles are shorter and start light. Remember those days cycle fast and you will do better adding a small amount of weight each time that day repeats.

            The following charts project weight increases from cycle to cycle using the percentages given from the previous section. Although percentage ranges are given in the previous section, they need not be strictly adhered to and should be thought of as loose guidelines. These charts serve to provide a long-term view of what multiple cycles can produce.

These charts are just examples. Increase the loads from cycle to cycle based on your ability. 

Starting percentages of your daily 1RM

Day 1	Day 2	Day 3	Day 4	Day 5	Day 6	Day 7
25%	35%	45%	55%	65%	75%	85%

Percentage increase between cycles

Percentage added to the previously lifted weight, not the daily 1RM. For example, starting Day 1 with 125 pounds I began my next cycle at 140 pounds, roughly a 12% increase to the weight lifted during the preceding cycle.

Day 1	Day 2	Day 3	Day 4	Day 5	Day 6	Day 7
10% to 12.5%	7%   to 9%	5% to 7%	3% to 5%	2% to 3.5%	1.5% to 2.5%	1% to 2%

Remember, these are intended to be flexible ranges, allowing for sustainable progress from one cycle to the next.  

Daily Max Charts

The charts below outline 5 cycles starting each day with their respective percentage of the given initial daily 1RM (starting at 500, where I began). Each chart adds the respective percentage weight increase each cycle for each day.

            The below charts are examples. Use these as inspiration for your progression, or take from them exactly, should you feel your strength lines up with one of the below examples. If your daily max is greater than 500, then you will have to develop your own table using the information previously given in this post.  

500 Pound Daily Max

	Day 1	Day 2	Day 3	Day 4	Day 5	Day 6	Day 7
Cycle 1	125	175	225	275	325	375	425
Cycle 2	140	190	240	290	335	385	430
Cycle 3	155	205	255	305	345	395	435
Cycle 4	170	220	270	320	355	405	440
Cycle 5	190	240	290	335	365	415	445

450 Pound Daily Max

	Day 1	Day 2	Day 3	Day 4	Day 5	Day 6	Day 7
Cycle 1	115	160	205	250	295	340	385
Cycle 2	130	175	220	265	305	345	390
Cycle 3	145	190	235	280	315	350	395
Cycle 4	160	205	250	295	325	355	400
Cycle 5	180	220	265	310	335	360	405

400 Pound Daily Max

	Day 1	Day 2	Day 3	Day 4	Day 5	Day 6	Day 7
Cycle 1	100	140	180	220	260	300	340
Cycle 2	110	150	190	230	270	305	345
Cycle 3	120	160	200	240	280	310	350
Cycle 4	135	175	215	250	290	315	355
Cycle 5	150	190	230	265	300	320	360

350 Pound Daily Max

	Day 1	Day 2	Day 3	Day 4	Day 5	Day 6	Day 7
Cycle 1	90	125	160	195	230	265	300
Cycle 2	100	135	170	205	240	270	305
Cycle 3	110	145	180	215	250	275	310
Cycle 4	120	155	190	225	260	280	315
Cycle 5	135	165	200	235	270	285	320

300 Pound Daily Max

	Day 1	Day 2	Day 3	Day 4	Day 5	Day 6	Day 7
Cycle 1	75	105	135	165	195	225	255
Cycle 2	85	115	145	175	200	230	260
Cycle 3	95	125	155	185	205	235	265
Cycle 4	105	135	165	195	210	240	270
Cycle 5	115	145	175	205	215	245	275

Daily and Cycle Breakdown Charts

            This table breaks down each day’s volume, weights started with, cycle lengths, and progression across cycles. Use it to help digest the details of the previous sections.

This sheet is accessible in the above linked compendium.

Alternate View

            This table uses kilograms and a different table format of each day’s cycle progression. This is so that a greater understanding of how Maelstrom is constructed and how each day progresses may be developed. This is the same information presented differently.

    This sheet is accessible in the above linked compendium.

Conclusion

            Maelstrom was a grueling program that I was scared of when I started. The whole thing seemed like it would swallow me up. As the cycles progressed and the volume increased, I felt as if I were descending into some bleak funnel of endless reps. Yet, the tides change. So too did the deadlifting, which came at the perfect time - when hope began to fade. 

            Just like the mariner in the above linked story "A Descent into the Maelstrom" by Edgar Allan Poe, I came out of the storm alive but changed.  Looking at it, the progression seems too much. Being in it, it feels the same, some days. Others, when the volume resets, provide a brief respite, just enough to look out into the storm and appreciate the grandness, violence, and peculiar beauty.

            That is what I learned from this high-volume high-frequency deadlift progression. In the midst of it, when on rep 72 of 100 with a pump from neck to calves, and that weak voice cries quit... I summoned the will to snuff out, at least momentarily, the defeatist within me. If I can find ways to keep doing that, maybe one day I will be rid of him.

Sisyphus pushes on long after your name has been forgotten.
You can manage a few minutes.

Monotony
One exercise for time

Bottom Line Up Front: As Many Sets as Possible (AMSAP) with one exercise against the clock.

Progression Options:

1.     Add weight while continuing with the same number of reps per set within the same time limit.

2.     Add a rep to each set while continuing with the same weight within the same time limit.

3.     Add more time while continuing with the same weight and the same reps per set.

Of course, those progression options could be combined, but I like to keep things simple and only do one in a single workout. Over the course of several weeks, I may choose option two until reaching a threshold, then I may choose option one or option three; alternating between the options as I see fit.

It is suggested that you likewise keep things simple, for simplicity provides clear progression while also fulfilling such a workouts namesake.

On Monotony

            Many see the word monotony in a negative light. With such a bleak and short-sighted outlook, no wonder it is synonymous with boredom. However, in a training setting, monotony can be a good thing. It breeds consistency, ushering results. Monotony forges patience, delaying gratification, creating a greater trophy at the end of the ordeal. I urge you to embrace Monotony in at least one part of your training for a period. Monotony is an underrated and little used means of developing simultaneously our minds and bodies.

“It is better to see monotony as a positive force of our own creation. Like the erosion that shaped the Grand Canyon, so too does the monotony we endure shape us, revealing our greatness a little more each day. This process births self-awareness through patient endurance, in time building the strength of character only achievable by remaining active and conscious in our development.” – Physicality, Creativity, Consciousness

The concept that follows and the workouts derived from it are monotonous. Though boring, I’ve rarely felt achievement like I did when finishing a 20-minute bout of squats with 135 pounds. The same is true for so many other lifts that I’ve used with the training approach I call Monotony. These workouts are detailed in later sections of this post.

Monotony’s Origins

            I began implementing these kinds of workouts for two reasons. The first was that I wanted to increase my conditioning specific to one exercise, the squat. This was last year when I was trying to complete a series of extremely high rep squat goals. The second reason was that I had opened a gym, and though I was always in it, suddenly I found myself having less time to train, or needing to train at irregular times.

So, rather than skip a workout because I did not have the time, I instead opted to make the best use of the time I could set aside for training, even if that was just 10 to 20 minutes. I have found that even at my busiest I could carve out 10 minutes of my day to focus my mind and remaining energy on completing one task: a workout that is just one exercise, all out. Productive training can be achieved in many ways.

While adjusting several variables such as load and volume are popular, adjusting time is less used, especially in the circles from which my usual style of training originated: powerlifting and bodybuilding. It is impossible to conform a typical powerlifting or bodybuilding workout to so short a time. So, rather than skip training because in those limited paradigms such a short workout would be seen as suboptimal, I instead chose to optimize the time I did have and instead lift according to a different worldview of training. Enter Girevoy Sport.

I took inspiration for this concept from Girevoy Sport, AKA Kettlebell Sport. Using kettlebells, competitors perform a lift in a specific amount of time without setting down the kettlebells. Think of how hard a 20-rep set of squats is. Now instead of just 20-reps, keep doing reps for ten minutes, without racking the weight. That’s Girevoy Sport, a criminally underrated strength sport that tests strength-endurance rather than limit strength, as all other strength sports do (apart from some events in strongman and some in CrossFit competitions).

Where I departed from Girevoy Sport is that I allowed myself to set down or rack the weight. This opened the door to doing more reps and using more weight without sacrificing too much of the primary goal: to train strength-endurance with a single lift. What it came down to was trying to complete as many sets as possible within a given amount of time. Depending on the lift it might be a set every 45, 30, or even 20 seconds. Monotony’s approach is like doing a set Every Minute on the Minute (EMOM) but faster.

Reps Per Minute (RPM)

            The goal of Monotony is to have a high RPM. Therefore, it is best to start light and for few reps per set (just singles, doubles, and triples at first) going for less than 10 minutes. Doing so will allow you to maintain a fast pace, or RPM. Once you have some shorter Monotony sessions completed, add a few minutes while trying to maintain that same RPM.

I have started with 10-minute sessions at approximately 25 seconds per set and ramped that up to 20 minutes while maintaining the same RPM. I have even achieved double progression where I added time and managed to increase my RPM; such is possible because Monotony will improve your skill and stamina with the lift you are training with the Monotony approach. This kind of work helped me accomplish an extensive list of high rep squat sets ranging from 25-rep maxes to a 100-rep max (all reps completed without racking the bar).

When employing Monotony for a lift, be mindful of your RPM. If your RPM decreases significantly after adding weight, reps, or time (more than 15 seconds is my personal standard, you can set your own) consider reducing one or more of those factors. For example, if you went from 10 minutes to 20 minutes without ramping up to that 20-minute session, you might see your RPM decline around the 15-minute mark. Likewise, if you were previously using 60% of a 1RM for 10 minutes and increased to 70%, or if you went from doing sets of two reps to sets of five reps. Though small numbers, keep in mind that you are doubling (or more) that variable, whether it is time when going from 10 to 20 minutes or volume when going from doubles to sets of five.

Starting Monotony

            This is not a program that you commit to for all your lifts. I do not recommend that. This can be how you train a single lift within a larger training plan. Does this have to be the only way you train that lift? No, of course not. So, for example, if your heavy bench day is Monday and you have a lighter bench day later in the week, then you might employ the Monotony approach to develop the lighter bench work you had already planned to do.

You can also employ Monotony as I did. Using this approach on days when time has nearly run out and you have just ten to twenty minutes to train. I did not plan these kinds of days, they just happened. When they did, I devised a way that allowed me to still complete a productive training session: Monotony.

            Monotony uses light weights for high reps in a short time. Therefore, I do not suggest you use this approach for your truly heavy work; weights more than 85% of your 1-rep max, for example. I suggest you start light and gradually build up your reps and/or your time until you reach a threshold at which you then add weight.

            There are a few considerations when using Monotony for your training:

1.     Use a light weight.

a.      50% to 60% of your 1RM - or - a weight you can perform for 15 to 20 reps in a single all-out set (not talking about breathing squat widow maker sets here).

                                                              i.     Heavier weights may be used if the reps per set are singles or doubles.

                                                            ii.     These reps should be non-stop, piston like, without a nanosecond of rest at the top or bottom of each rep. As you fatigue, do your best to continue performing reps in this manner. 

2.     Keep the reps per set to very few.

a.      Choose sets of 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 reps. I have never gone above 5 reps per set because the sets themselves will take more time, often resulting in a “breathing rest” to complete the last one or two reps before racking the weight, especially towards the end of the time period. Avoid doing this by properly managing load, time, and reps progression.

b.     The goal is to use the same number of reps for all sets in the period.

c.      Fewer reps per set allows for more weight, such as doing singles. In this case you might use 70% to 80% of your 1RM or a weight you can lift for 10 reps in a single all-out set (at a quick tempo, not breathing squats). I did not do this much at all, as the RPM was too slow for me.

3.     Start with a short period.

a.      Begin with 10 minutes and build your endurance from there. If you start at 50% of your 1RM and perform sets of 5 reps, you will likely complete 15 to 20 sets, maybe several more. That is potentially more than 100 reps completed in just 10 minutes. For the average powerlifter or bodybuilder, that is a lot of volume in a very short time.

b.     Increase the time when your RPM remains steady throughout the period.

                                                              i.     If you started at a set every 30 seconds but barely finished the last two minutes with just one or two sets, then you should not increase the time but instead work towards completing more sets in the same amount of time with the same or reduced weight.

4.     Progress gradually by a single factor. Alternating these as you see fit, based on your performance. Increasing two or all three at once might be disastrous… but maybe not if you started very light, with very few reps, in a very short period.

a.     Add weight while continuing with the same number of reps per set within the same time limit.

b.     Add a rep to each set while continuing with the same weight within the same time limit.

c.     Add more time while continuing with the same weight and the same reps per set.

5.     Use compound exercises

a.      Squat, bench, deadlift, press, rows, lunges, etc.   

Example Workouts

            Below are workouts I have completed with the Monotony approach. Sometimes this was all I did because my training time was limited. Sometimes the lift I trained with Monotony was a part of a longer, more typically structured training session. Either is fine. Monotony, being as short as 10 minutes (that is as brief as I made it; it could be made shorter if you desire) can fill the gaps in your day where an otherwise usual workout is just too much. Similarly, you can employ Monotony to fill a gap in your training plan, whether to function as a component of a conditioning progression or to function to develop work capacity for a single lift as I did with the squat. Do you have 10-minutes to commit to being drowned in sets and sweat yet survive as a stronger being? Try Monotony. Survive. Improve.

            The following workouts are examples. You might try these yourself or take inspiration for your own version. Be warned: take a few weeks to build up to longer periods of Monotony (15+ minutes), especially when performing higher rep (4 or 5) sets because the total volume accumulated in such a brief period can be incredibly high. The lighter the weight the faster you can move, and the shorter the rest between sets can be. It is possible to eclipse 200 total reps in 20 minutes. If your training is composed of usual bodybuilding or powerlifting programs, then you perhaps can complete such a workout, but you likely do not have the ability to recover from a longer, higher volume bout with Monotony.

            A final caution: Rhabdomyolysis is real. Monotony hedges a sensible progression against such a risk. Therefore, start with a shorter time with fewer reps with light weight. Proceed with your health in mind.

            These are some of the workouts I have completed using the Monotony approach. I built up to the 15-to-20-minute periods from starting with 10 minutes, so once more, I urge you to do the same.

·       Squat 135 pounds x5 reps for 20 minutes. 44 sets complete.

o   This was about 30% of my estimated 1RM at the time.

·       Press 155 pounds x2 reps for 20 minutes. 37 sets complete.

o   This was about 70% of my estimated 1RM at the time.

·       1-Arm Dumbbell Row 50 pounds x5 reps (per arm) for 20 minutes. 45 sets complete.

o   I could row this weight for 20 strict reps at the time.

·       Press 185 pounds x1 rep for 20 minutes. 43 sets complete.

o   This was around 75% of my 1RM at the time.

·       Squat 315 pounds x2 reps for 20 minutes. 30 sets complete.

o   This was around 60% of my 1RM at the time.

·       Press 205 pounds x1 rep for 20 minutes. 27 sets complete.

o   This was around 85% of my 1RM at the time. The heaviest I have gone by percentage of my 1RM.

·       Press 135 pounds x3 reps for 30 minutes. 51 sets complete.

o   This was around 85% of my 1RM at the time. The longest I stretched Monotony for. My RPM declined steadily after 20 minutes.

·       Pull Ups (no added weight) x2 reps for 20 minutes. 70 sets complete.

o   My max reps at the time were around 12.

·       Pull Ups (no added weight) x2 reps for 30 minutes. 82 sets complete, +1 single.

o   My max reps at the time were around 12. Compared to the above 20-minute period, you can see how significantly my RPM declined after 20 minutes. This was the second time I tried to last 30 minutes (which did not go as well as I hoped for).

·       Deadlift 405 pounds x1 rep for 20 minutes. 37 sets complete.

o   This was around 67.5% of my max at the time.

·       Bench Press 80 kilograms (176 lbs.) x3 reps for 15 minutes. 26 sets complete.

o   This was around 60% of my max at the time.

o   During this period of my training I was benching very little while favoring the strict overhead press more. So, my work capacity and max strength was very low at this time.

·       Sled Push/Pull 320 pounds for 30 minutes. 1 lap = 35 feet. 72 laps complete.

o   Using the sled is easier for longer periods of time and is far less fatiguing than doing something like squats and deadlifts for the legs.

o   This was performed after squatting 315 pounds for 21 reps in a single set.

·       Alternating 1-Arm Dumbbell Clean & Press 30 pounds for 15 minutes. 220 reps complete.

o   I had not done this before cleaning each rep from the ground, so I used a lighter dumbbell. Because of this my RPM was faster than anticipated. 

I am sure you see a trend with the above workouts. There is only one deadlift and one bench example. This is because at the time I was just getting back into benching due to a persistent issue I have with my shoulder. Because of this issue, I have not consistently used Monotony for bench because I must be more cautious with my set up, and even then, my shoulder might not comply. Therefore, I encourage you to do the same. Do not use Monotony with a lift that causes you trouble or that you are more prone to injury when performing.

Regarding my deadlift, I was experimenting with a very unusual and high-volume program called Maelstrom. Therefore, I have not done much deadlifting with the Monotony approach. However, because these two have an overlap, volume, I do plan on using Monotony in the future when it comes to deadlift training. 

Lift often. Get wide.