C.S. Sloan's Integral Strength

Bradley Steiner's "Rugged Size and Strength Program" Version 2.0 A.K.A.: The New, Improved, Totally Bad-Ass Rugged Size and Strength Program for 21st Century Mass and Power! Bradley Steiner flexing his well-developed arms.  This picture was taken sometime in the '70s.   Anyone who has read my blog with more than passing interest knows that one of my inspirations has always been Bradley Steiner (sometimes his name would appear as Bradly J.  Steiner).  For those of you who are unfamiliar with Steiner, he wrote a LOT of really good articles for the old IronMan  magazine in the '70s and '80s, and he wrote a monthly column for them for decades, into the 21st century. Steiner was the  voice of basic, sensible, but tough  programs using full-body workouts.  In turn, he inspired a lot of other writers (Stuart McRobert probably was the most well-known) who wrote for IronMan  starting in the '80s, and continuing to this day.  And his training prog...

  It never fails. It's an utter truth. And no matter how many times we remind ourselves NOT to do it, we do it anyway. So what is "it"?  IT  is our natural tendency to want to make things more complex; it's our natural tendency to slide away  from the simple, and to look for things of more complexity; it is our urge - no matter how many times we tell ourselves that it's going to be different - to NOT  do the basic training that we should  be doing! The "original" power-builder  Pat Casey built his mass and strength using the basics! Why do we do this?  The primary reason is probably nothing more than human nature.  We convince ourselves that we will get better results if only  we do more - more exercises, more sets and reps, more days of training, multiple exercises-per-bodypart, endless variations of different exercises... the list seems to go on and on. I suppose before going much further, I should add a caveat: variation  and vol...

Reg Park - seen here in his 50s - built ALL of his muscle by keeping it simple! What follows might be slightly rambling (hey, it’s my blog so I can ramble however much I want).  So… I sat down at my computer this morning to crank out - or at least attempt to crank out - my second installment on “Sets and Reps”, a follow-up to my “Frequency” Fundamentals post from a few months ago, when I said to myself, “ya’ know, CS” (I always talk to myself in my mind in the third person for some damn reason) “I think you jumped the gun a little bit.  Maybe you need to just tell everyone to keep it simple, and stop trying to be so complex, before you get into the varying nuances of sets and reps .” Now, why did I tell myself this?  A couple of reasons. First, it started with a co-worker of mine who wanted to know about “sets and reps” himself.  He has been going to the gym for several months, and, of course, not making the best progress because he has been attempting to “go it alon...

 When I first began working on this series, I was going to title it "Back-to-Basics".  However, I've had a change of heart.  From henceforth (man, that sounds official), this series will be titled "Fundamentals" in an homage to the great Bradley Steiner, who penned a column of the same name for Ironman Magazine  for a few decades beginning in the '70s. Bradley Steiner is seen here on the cover of one of his training booklets Steiner preached no-nonsense, sane, sensible training - almost ALWAYS full-body, 3-days-per-week workouts.  The man had a profound effect upon me through all of his many articles, not just as a lifter but as a writer and trainer. Everything in the rest of this series will follow his sane, sensible, no-nonsense theory of training. In the first post, I discussed workout frequency.  If you haven't done so, read that one first.  This one will build upon that one. Okay, now, before we get into the specifics  of the sets and reps ...