Week 2021.08.09

This Week’s Conditioning

Option 1
Sled
Outdoors:
10-20 x 25 yds EMOM at a weight of your choice

Every minute, push the sled 25 yards, i.e., if pushing the sled takes 20 seconds, then you have 40 seconds to rest. Perform 10-20 rounds.

Indoors:
10-20 x 100 ft EMOM at a weight of your choice

Every minute, push the sled 100 feet, i.e., if pushing the sled takes 20 seconds, then you have 40 seconds to rest. Perform 10-20 rounds.

Compare to 2021.06.07.

Option 2
Bike/row:
4 x 800m

Rest 3 minutes between each round. Score = slowest time.

Compare to 2021.05.17.

Option 3
Outdoors:
10 rounds:
25 yd yoke carry
Rest 1 minute

Indoors:
10 rounds:
30 yd yoke carry (15 yd down-back)
Rest 1 minute

Compare to 2021.04.19.

Option 4
10 x 50 ft farmer carry
Each carry is 25 ft down and 25 ft back and is for time. Rest 1 minute between carries.

Women: 97# per handle (80# of plates)
Men: 137# per handle (120# of plates)
(Note: Each handle weighs 17#.)

Compare to 2021.04.12.

Equipment Review: The ONLY Power Rack You Should Buy from Rogue Fitness

Rogue R-3.JPG

Rogue Fitness makes a number of different power racks, but you should only buy one of them. Specifically, get the R-3 Power Rack. More specifically, don’t get anything in the Monster Lite or Monster line of equipment. Here’s why:

Same functionality at a lower price
When it comes to barbell training - squatting, pressing, benching, etc. - the R-3 will do everything that it’s fancier, beefier cousins in the Monster Lite (ML) and Monster (M) lines will do, but it will do it at a lower price point. We have the bolt-together version of the R-3 at Testify (“R-3BT”), and here’s the price comparison across the three lines of equipment as of August 2021:

R-3BT (R-Series line): $785
RML-390BT (ML line): $910
RM-3 (M line): $1,180

Looking at these numbers, you’ll save anywhere from $125 - $395 by choosing the R-3 over the pricer models. I’ve heard some people claim that they want the ML or M versions because those racks can hold more weight. Know this - according to Rogue, the j-hooks on the R-3 are rated to hold 1,000 lbs each . . . and the hooks are the weakest point of the entire rack. You’re welcome to purchase something stronger - just know that it’s a preference and not anything like a necessity. 

More room inside and outside the cage
The R-3 uses 2” x 3” tubing for the uprights while the ML and M lines utilize 3” x 3” tubing. This means that each upright on the ML and M versions is 1” wider than that of the R-3. This, in turn, means that you’ll lose a half-inch horizontally per upright on the inside of the cage (for a total loss of 1”), and you’ll also lose a half-inch horizontally per upright on the outside of the cage (again, for a total loss of 1”). In other words, going with the ML/M lines, you are choosing a rack that is both 1” narrower on the inside as well as 1” wider on the outside.

Regarding the width inside the rack - if you have stiff, inflexible shoulders, then you’ll appreciate all the room inside the cage you can get when placing your hands on the bar to squat. The last thing you want is to lose a pinky finger when racking the bar at the end of a set or possibly when setting the bar on the safeties in the case of a missed rep. The R-3 wins here.

Regarding the width outside the rack - if you’ve ever rattled the plates against the outside of the rack when unracking or racking a squat or a press, then the last thing you want is a wider rack that would make that situation all the more likely. Not everyone has this problem, but it’s certainly common enough to take into account when purchasing your rack. Again, the R-3 wins in this department.

It’s worth noting that, by going with the ML/L lines, you get some customization options that you don’t get with the R-3, and if that’s worth the extra money to you, that is absolutely fine (and the paint colors do look pretty sweet). However, for sheer price and function (and if you’re specifically shopping at Rogue), our recommendation is to get the R-3 - either the welded version or the bolt-together version. If you stop and visit us at Testify Strength & Conditioning in Omaha, NE, you’ll see we’ve definitely put our money where our mouth is (mouths are?).

Week 2021.08.02

This Week’s Conditioning

Option 1
Sled
Outdoors:
10 rounds of:
Push sled 100 ft
Pull sled 100 ft (hand over hand)

Indoors:
20 rounds of:
Push sled 50 ft
Pull sled 50 ft (hand over hand)

Compare to 2021.05.31.

Option 2
Bike/row:
4 x 3 minutes

Rest 3 minutes between each round. Score = lowest distance.

Compare to 2021.05.10.

Option 3
Outdoors:
5-10 rounds:
10 sledgehammer strikes (5R, 5L)
50 yd farmer carry (25 yd down-back)
Rest 1 minute

Indoors:
5-10 rounds:
10 sledgehammer strikes (5R, 5L)
100 ft farmer carry (50 ft down-back)
Rest 1 minute

Compare to 2021.04.12.

Option 4
1. 5 yoke carries @ 30 yd (15 yd downback) – work up to heaviest carry
2. 5 rounds of 5 reps on the axle “clean and press away” – work up to heavy set of 5

Compare to 2021.04.05.

Convert Kilograms to Pounds the Easy Way!

As a lifter, you may occasionally find it necessary to do some mental math and convert from kilograms to pounds. The common recommendation is to take the number of kilograms, multiply that number by 2.2, and you’ll have your answer (the conversion factor is actually 2.2046226 . . ., but let’s not get carried away). If you’ve been doing this . . . stop. Stop it right now.

Do this instead:

Plates1.jpg
  1. Take the number of kilograms and double it.

  2. Find 10% of your result (i.e., move the decimal point one place to the left).

  3. Add the two numbers from step 1 and step 2 together.

  4. Amaze your friends with your lightning-fast mental math.

This method is equivalent to multiplying by 2.2, but it’s easier to do in your head than trying to multiply by 2.2.

Let’s try this out with 90 kg: 

  1. 90 x 2 = 180

  2. 10% of 180 = 18 (remember - you’re just moving the decimal point)

  3. 180 + 18 = 198

Thus, 90 kg = 198 lbs.

Here’s a slightly more challenging example with 105 kg:

  1. 105 x 2 = 210

  2. 10% of 210 = 21

  3. 210 + 21 = 231

Thus, 105 kg = 231 lbs.

You’ll note that both 90 kg and 105 kg are multiples of 5, which makes the process fairly straightforward. If you have a weight that isn’t a multiple of 5, you can still use this method, or you can simply use the nearest multiple of 5 and make a small adjustment after the fact (using the knowledge that 1 kg = 2.2 lbs). Let’s try this with 36 kg. Since 36 is close to 35, we’ll use 35 as our “base number”:

  1. 35 x 2 = 70

  2. 10% of 70 = 7

  3. 70 + 7 = 77

  4. Since 36 kg is 1 kg larger than 35 kg, and 1 kg is just a little over 2 lbs, we can add 2 lbs to 77 lbs to get 79 lbs.

Thus, 36 kg is equal to just a bit over 79 lbs (79.366 . . . if you want to compare our approximate answer with the actual value).

With practice, this method will be faster than getting out your phone and using its calculator or asking Siri. It becomes even quicker because you’ll naturally (and almost accidentally) start to memorize the multiples of 5 (i.e., 5 kg = 11 lbs, 10 kg = 22 lbs, 15 kg = 33 lbs, etc.). 

Now you know, and as a famous action figure once said, knowing is half the battle.

(Some links may be affiliate links. As an Amazon Associate, Testify earns from qualifying purchases.)

If you found this helpful, you’ll love our weekly email. It’s got useful videos, articles, and training tips just like the one in this article. Sign up below, and of course, if you don’t love it, you can unsubscribe at any time.


At Testify, we offer small group training, private coaching (in-person or remotely via Zoom), online coaching, and form checks. Would you like to get quality coaching from a Starting Strength Coach?

click here to start today

Week 2021.07.26

This Week’s Conditioning

Option 1
Sled Pyramid – 4, 5, or 6 tiers
Go up and down a 4, 5, or 6 tier “sled pyramid” – rest as needed. The distance for each round is 80 m indoors (a down-back on the 40m course) or 200 ft outdoors (2 down-backs on the 50 ft course). Rest as needed.

For example, Bob does the following (4 tiers):
Round 1: Empty sled
Round 2: 25#
Round 3: 50#
Round 4: 75#
Round 5: 50#
Round 6: 25#
Round 7: Empty sled

Compare to 2021.05.24.

Option 2
Bike/row:
5 min on
4 min off
4 min on
3 min off
3 min on
2 min off
2 min on
1 min off
1 min on

Record distance for each interval and add for total distance.

Compare to 2021.05.03.

Option 3
5-10 rounds of:
30 sec ME tire flips
30 sec rest

Compare to 2021.04.05.

Option 4
Sandbag-over-bars
Set yoke at #33 for women or #35 for men.
1. 1 minute AMRAP
2. 5 rounds of 2 reps every 2 minutes (speed!)
3. 1 minute AMRAP

Weights
Female under 40 years
140 lbs and under: 75 lbs
140.1 lbs – 185 lbs: 100 lbs
185.1 lbs and over: 150 lbs

Female 40 years and over
140 lbs and under: 50 lbs
185 lbs and under: 75 lbs
185.1 lbs and over: 100 lbs

Male under 40 years
185 lbs and under: 150 lbs
185.1 lbs – 235 lbs: 200 lbs
235.1 lbs and over: 250 lbs

Male 40 years and over
185 lbs and under: 100 lbs
185.1 lbs – 235 lbs: 150 lbs
235.1 lbs and over: 200 lbs

Compare to 2021.03.29.

Lifting Notation: Reps are Always Second

Lifting notation.JPG

(A Blast from the Past article originally posted on 11/20/18)

You train - you don't exercise. And because you train, you keep a training journal. You record your warm-ups and your work sets, but one thing that keeps tripping you up is the notation. You can never remember which comes first . . . sets? Reps? Weights?

Let's talk a bit about this. Generally, there are two methods of notating your training: "sets x reps" and "weight x reps x sets." Thus, if your program calls for you to squat 3 sets of 5 reps, you'll probably see "3 x 5" in your program, and when you record your work sets in your journal, you'll write "165 x 5 x 3" (if you squatted 165 lbs, for example).

You'll notice that the order of "reps" vs "sets" gets reversed in the two methods, and this is what throws people off. With that in mind, allow me to suggest a rule that might help you keep things straight: Reps are always second.

For example, if you see "4 x 6," you'll know that it means 4 sets of 6 reps since 6 is the second number, and reps are always second. Likewise, if you write "145 x 6 x 4" for your squat workout, you're indicating that you squatted 145 for 4 sets of 6 reps since - again - 6 is the second number, and . . . reps are always second. In this case, you call on your grade school skills and use context clues to determine that 145 lbs must be the weight and 4 must be the number of sets . . . since squatting 4 lbs for 145 sets is just plain ridiculous.

Hope this helps!