OHP vs Bench

[lennarn]

I have 100% confidence in the bench press building my chest, but will it build my shoulders. I was going for squat, bench, weighted pull up, will weighted pull ups build my shoulders? Sorry if these questions are odd.

I bench with pretty tucked elbows, and I really feel the fatigue mostly in my tricepses and shoulders. I used to worry like you do, but I have made peace with the concept of more load = more growth, so I'll just keep benching and throw in OHP every now and then. I won't focus on OHP before I reach an intermediate BP. Weighted pull ups will load your posterior deltoids (which according to bodybuilders are important for round shoulders), but the growth I've noticed the most from WPU has been my arms.

[Aelian]

Ideally you would do both, and it is the reason both are included in typical programs (SS, 5/3/1, etc). One really isn't an alternative to the other, and you will need to balance them for even development and shoulder health.

Operator is very effective, but it requires sacrifices. You hit 3 full body lifts 3 times a week and that will develop a lot of what you need, but it isn't complete. You will either need to swap some exercises every other block, do assistance work through conditioning, or switch to Zulu for more exercises. It all depends on what you want out of it. Personally I am thinking of switching to Zulu for a little more balance.

Are you sure about that? Are these programs complete:

Korte 3x3 (produced multiple world IPF champs in PL'ng, consists of only SQ-BP-DL)
Faleev 80/20 (SQ-BP-DL)

Or for another angle:

Russian Bear
Power to the People
Simple and Sinister (2 exercises only! No legs?)

Now you did say "it depends on what you want out of it", so obviously you get that it depends on your goals. So purely for (an interesting) discussion's sake, I'd like to get a little more in-depth into what "complete" means in terms of programming.

My point is that specific programs have specific goals. A marathon runner reading Joel Jamieson's Ultimate MMA Conditioning book would no doubt claim it's base building/running component was incomplete because it lacks the depth and specificity a marathon runner's base building might contain. Yet it's used by his UFC fighters, who are some of the most well-conditioned athletes in the octagon (Mighty Mouse for example). So there's obviously more than enough cardio in his program for the job.

Likewise someone coming from a world of strength books authored by powerlifters might think the strength training contained in Ross Enamait's books are inadequate because they're judging it from a strength-only point of view. They would probably fall ill reading Simple and Sinister. Yet how many competitive boxers and serious combat athletes follow an in-depth strength training program like Texas Method? Can they do a specialist strength program and still remain competitive?

TB isn't in the same category as 5/3/1 or SS, it's more like a very advanced Crossfit that actually does what Crossfit was supposed to do (make you good at everything) for occupational fitness. Whereas Crossfit uses a random nonsensical approach and fails at maximum-strength and aerobic-endurance, TB has that covered to a much greater degree. TB will get you to that "500 deadlift with the ability to pick up and run a half-marathon" as commonly touted. Good luck getting there with Crossfit (I tried). Starting Strength + Texas Method might get you to a 700-800lb deadlift etc. but not much else.

Posters comparing TB or other programs with programs that are about strength-ONLY are coming in with an inaccurate paradigm. TB isn't for the Starting Strength/Texas Method crowd, marathon runners or gymnasts. It's for tactical professionals that have to be good at everything, a unique category in it's own right. "Tactical professional" is a large category though. You're talking anything from Navy SEAL to traffic cop. TB allows for great variation along that wide spectrum. A Navy SEAL can't train like a traffic cop, and a traffic cop doesn't need to train like a SEAL. Both can use the variations in TB programming to come up with the appropriate personal protocol.

Apologies for the super long post, this is an area of discussion I enjoy, and I've seen it come up a few times. Mostly from posters trying to mentally shelve TB alongside Starting Strength,531, or PL programs, rather than where it belongs.

[Xray]

Great discussion guys.

I'll throw my hat in the ring. I used Operator coming up 18 months with just bench, no OHP. It brought me from a stagnant 205 to 290. I had been using 5/3/1 BBB template when I hit the 205 wall. Someone on Reddit suggested a switch to Operator to get past my bench plateau, which subsequently brought me to TB. I did a test day (for a Zulu block) a couple months back, and my OHP tested at 165. That's after a year and a half of no press whatsoever, just bench. My prior best was 145-150.

[Saracen]

TB isn't in the same category as 5/3/1 or SS, it's more like a very advanced Crossfit that actually does what Crossfit was supposed to do (make you good at everything) for occupational fitness. Whereas Crossfit uses a random nonsensical approach and fails at maximum-strength and aerobic-endurance, TB has that covered to a much greater degree. TB will get you to that "500 deadlift with the ability to pick up and run a half-marathon" as commonly touted. Good luck getting there with Crossfit (I tried). Starting Strength + Texas Method might get you to a 700-800lb deadlift etc. but not much else.

Posters comparing TB or other programs with programs that are about strength-ONLY are coming in with an inaccurate paradigm. TB isn't for the Starting Strength/Texas Method crowd, marathon runners or gymnasts. It's for tactical professionals that have to be good at everything, a unique category in it's own right.

I made the same point about comparing TB to CF while back on the sub...in my mind I see it as doing SS and saying it's incomplete because it doesn't contain HIC or SE. Which would be incorrect, because SS is complete for it's intended purpose & audience.

[Saracen]

Great discussion guys.

I'll throw my hat in the ring. I used Operator coming up 18 months with just bench, no OHP. It brought me from a stagnant 205 to 290. I had been using 5/3/1 BBB template when I hit the 205 wall. Someone on Reddit suggested a switch to Operator to get past my bench plateau, which subsequently brought me to TB. I did a test day (for a Zulu block) a couple months back, and my OHP tested at 165. That's after a year and a half of no press whatsoever, just bench. My prior best was 145-150.

First off, nice job! Did you do any KB swings? Did you notice any shoulder issues leaving out the OHP? What was the rest of your cluster?

[Sorntel]

Do them both. Use the BP in your max-strength cluster, and get in some push-press and kettlebell swings during your conditioning, SE, etc. Every once in a while do a block of OHP for max-strength.

The bench primarily emphasizes the pectorals & anterior delts, with a secondary effect on the medial/posterior delts and triceps. Even the lats are engaged to some degree as stabilizers.

The OHP primarily emphasizes the delts (anterior, medial, posterior) with a secondary effect on the triceps. It would seem the bench does more overall (targets more muscle groups + ability to use more weight) than the OHP, but the OHP does more for just the shoulders in particular.

@Joseph, what are your goals exactly? Muscle size? If you want to take a more traditional strength training route then consider Stechkin's advice and look at doing Zulu instead of Operator.

[Stechkin]

Ideally you would do both, and it is the reason both are included in typical programs (SS, 5/3/1, etc). One really isn't an alternative to the other, and you will need to balance them for even development and shoulder health.

Operator is very effective, but it requires sacrifices. You hit 3 full body lifts 3 times a week and that will develop a lot of what you need, but it isn't complete. You will either need to swap some exercises every other block, do assistance work through conditioning, or switch to Zulu for more exercises. It all depends on what you want out of it. Personally I am thinking of switching to Zulu for a little more balance.

Are you sure about that? Are these programs complete:

Korte 3x3 (produced multiple world IPF champs in PL'ng, consists of only SQ-BP-DL)
Faleev 80/20 (SQ-BP-DL)

Or for another angle:

Russian Bear
Power to the People
Simple and Sinister (2 exercises only! No legs?)

Now you did say "it depends on what you want out of it", so obviously you get that it depends on your goals. So purely for (an interesting) discussion's sake, I'd like to get a little more in-depth into what "complete" means in terms of programming.

My point is that specific programs have specific goals. A marathon runner reading Joel Jamieson's Ultimate MMA Conditioning book would no doubt claim it's base building/running component was incomplete because it lacks the depth and specificity a marathon runner's base building might contain. Yet it's used by his UFC fighters, who are some of the most well-conditioned athletes in the octagon (Mighty Mouse for example). So there's obviously more than enough cardio in his program for the job.

Likewise someone coming from a world of strength books authored by powerlifters might think the strength training contained in Ross Enamait's books are inadequate because they're judging it from a strength-only point of view. They would probably fall ill reading Simple and Sinister. Yet how many competitive boxers and serious combat athletes follow an in-depth strength training program like Texas Method? Can they do a specialist strength program and still remain competitive?

TB isn't in the same category as 5/3/1 or SS, it's more like a very advanced Crossfit that actually does what Crossfit was supposed to do (make you good at everything) for occupational fitness. Whereas Crossfit uses a random nonsensical approach and fails at maximum-strength and aerobic-endurance, TB has that covered to a much greater degree. TB will get you to that "500 deadlift with the ability to pick up and run a half-marathon" as commonly touted. Good luck getting there with Crossfit (I tried). Starting Strength + Texas Method might get you to a 700-800lb deadlift etc. but not much else.

Posters comparing TB or other programs with programs that are about strength-ONLY are coming in with an inaccurate paradigm. TB isn't for the Starting Strength/Texas Method crowd, marathon runners or gymnasts. It's for tactical professionals that have to be good at everything, a unique category in it's own right. "Tactical professional" is a large category though. You're talking anything from Navy SEAL to traffic cop. TB allows for great variation along that wide spectrum. A Navy SEAL can't train like a traffic cop, and a traffic cop doesn't need to train like a SEAL. Both can use the variations in TB programming to come up with the appropriate personal protocol.

Apologies for the super long post, this is an area of discussion I enjoy, and I've seen it come up a few times. Mostly from posters trying to mentally shelve TB alongside Starting Strength,531, or PL programs, rather than where it belongs.

My main point is that no program can accomplish everything at once, so the OP should prioritise his goals and make sacrifices where necessary. TB works because it doesn't have you do everything at once like Crossfit. You build a base (which requires sacrificing strength work for a while), and then add on from there. If you are a powerlifter and your goal is to be good at the squat, bench and deadlift, then doing only the squat, bench and deadlift may well be a complete program for you. But if you want a bigger chest and shoulders, on top of also squatting and doing WPU, and you only have 3 exercises to work with, then something is going to have to be (temporarily) sacrificed. People's goals are always in flux, and reading this forum you will see that everyone is constantly making slight changes and corrections to balance things out (switching exercises, doing a little more/less volume, etc) If there were such a thing as a complete program then everybody would be on it and we wouldn't need this forum to discuss different approaches.

I wasn't trying to compare TB to SS or anything else, my point was that 3 exercises will not give you complete coverage of everything, so you should be making occasional corrections for balance. This is fine, and is not bashing TB. In fact, the flexibility of TB is what drew me to it in the first place. If you want a bigger chest and shoulders, you can swap out WPU or squats for a block or two to bring up those areas. In my case, I've been doing OHP/WCU/TBDL for the past year and a half. It has been great for strength gains, but has done nothing to fix my poor computer posture from years of sitting around, in fact it has probably made it worse (chins aren't a great pull to balance things out with, as the lats internally rotate the shoulder). Clearly this isn't a complete program for me. If I switched to something like SS, it wouldn't be complete either, as it isn't designed to address my particular weaknesses and will probably lead me to an eventual injury. So for a few blocks I will cut down or cut out the things that are making the problem worse or have an injury potential (chins, OHP) and switch to something that will correct it (rows and more rows). Clearly this isn't a complete program either, since I'm neglecting fundamental movement patterns, but it's what I need for the moment. Everyone has different weaknesses and different starting points, so a cookie cutter program will never be complete. But that is where the strength of TB lies - it is close to complete in the long term. And this is because you can make constant adjustments every few weeks to bring up your weak areas. If you tried to train like a powerlifter, a bodybuilder and a marathon runner all at once you will crash and burn. But if you build a strength base, then maintain that strength while bringing up your endurance/conditioning and making constant adjustments along the way to hold everything in balance, that is as close to complete as can be.

I hope this made sense, it's 4AM here.

[Aelian]

Ideally you would do both, and it is the reason both are included in typical programs (SS, 5/3/1, etc). One really isn't an alternative to the other, and you will need to balance them for even development and shoulder health.

Operator is very effective, but it requires sacrifices. You hit 3 full body lifts 3 times a week and that will develop a lot of what you need, but it isn't complete. You will either need to swap some exercises every other block, do assistance work through conditioning, or switch to Zulu for more exercises. It all depends on what you want out of it. Personally I am thinking of switching to Zulu for a little more balance.

Are you sure about that? Are these programs complete:

Korte 3x3 (produced multiple world IPF champs in PL'ng, consists of only SQ-BP-DL)
Faleev 80/20 (SQ-BP-DL)

Or for another angle:

Russian Bear
Power to the People
Simple and Sinister (2 exercises only! No legs?)

Now you did say "it depends on what you want out of it", so obviously you get that it depends on your goals. So purely for (an interesting) discussion's sake, I'd like to get a little more in-depth into what "complete" means in terms of programming.

My point is that specific programs have specific goals. A marathon runner reading Joel Jamieson's Ultimate MMA Conditioning book would no doubt claim it's base building/running component was incomplete because it lacks the depth and specificity a marathon runner's base building might contain. Yet it's used by his UFC fighters, who are some of the most well-conditioned athletes in the octagon (Mighty Mouse for example). So there's obviously more than enough cardio in his program for the job.

Likewise someone coming from a world of strength books authored by powerlifters might think the strength training contained in Ross Enamait's books are inadequate because they're judging it from a strength-only point of view. They would probably fall ill reading Simple and Sinister. Yet how many competitive boxers and serious combat athletes follow an in-depth strength training program like Texas Method? Can they do a specialist strength program and still remain competitive?

TB isn't in the same category as 5/3/1 or SS, it's more like a very advanced Crossfit that actually does what Crossfit was supposed to do (make you good at everything) for occupational fitness. Whereas Crossfit uses a random nonsensical approach and fails at maximum-strength and aerobic-endurance, TB has that covered to a much greater degree. TB will get you to that "500 deadlift with the ability to pick up and run a half-marathon" as commonly touted. Good luck getting there with Crossfit (I tried). Starting Strength + Texas Method might get you to a 700-800lb deadlift etc. but not much else.

Posters comparing TB or other programs with programs that are about strength-ONLY are coming in with an inaccurate paradigm. TB isn't for the Starting Strength/Texas Method crowd, marathon runners or gymnasts. It's for tactical professionals that have to be good at everything, a unique category in it's own right. "Tactical professional" is a large category though. You're talking anything from Navy SEAL to traffic cop. TB allows for great variation along that wide spectrum. A Navy SEAL can't train like a traffic cop, and a traffic cop doesn't need to train like a SEAL. Both can use the variations in TB programming to come up with the appropriate personal protocol.

Apologies for the super long post, this is an area of discussion I enjoy, and I've seen it come up a few times. Mostly from posters trying to mentally shelve TB alongside Starting Strength,531, or PL programs, rather than where it belongs.

My main point is that no program can accomplish everything at once, so the OP should prioritise his goals and make sacrifices where necessary. TB works because it doesn't have you do everything at once like Crossfit. You build a base (which requires sacrificing strength work for a while), and then add on from there. If you are a powerlifter and your goal is to be good at the squat, bench and deadlift, then doing only the squat, bench and deadlift may well be a complete program for you. But if you want a bigger chest and shoulders, on top of also squatting and doing WPU, and you only have 3 exercises to work with, then something is going to have to be (temporarily) sacrificed. People's goals are always in flux, and reading this forum you will see that everyone is constantly making slight changes and corrections to balance things out (switching exercises, doing a little more/less volume, etc) If there were such a thing as a complete program then everybody would be on it and we wouldn't need this forum to discuss different approaches.

I wasn't trying to compare TB to SS or anything else, my point was that 3 exercises will not give you complete coverage of everything, so you should be making occasional corrections for balance. This is fine, and is not bashing TB. In fact, the flexibility of TB is what drew me to it in the first place. If you want a bigger chest and shoulders, you can swap out WPU or squats for a block or two to bring up those areas. In my case, I've been doing OHP/WCU/TBDL for the past year and a half. It has been great for strength gains, but has done nothing to fix my poor computer posture from years of sitting around, in fact it has probably made it worse (chins aren't a great pull to balance things out with, as the lats internally rotate the shoulder). Clearly this isn't a complete program for me. If I switched to something like SS, it wouldn't be complete either, as it isn't designed to address my particular weaknesses and will probably lead me to an eventual injury. So for a few blocks I will cut down or cut out the things that are making the problem worse or have an injury potential (chins, OHP) and switch to something that will correct it (rows and more rows). Clearly this isn't a complete program either, since I'm neglecting fundamental movement patterns, but it's what I need for the moment. Everyone has different weaknesses and different starting points, so a cookie cutter program will never be complete. But that is where the strength of TB lies - it is close to complete in the long term. And this is because you can make constant adjustments every few weeks to bring up your weak areas. If you tried to train like a powerlifter, a bodybuilder and a marathon runner all at once you will crash and burn. But if you build a strength base, then maintain that strength while bringing up your endurance/conditioning and making constant adjustments along the way to hold everything in balance, that is as close to complete as can be.

I hope this made sense, it's 4AM here.

Great post, makes total sense. Apologies, it wasn't my intention to come across like you were bashing TB and I didn't get that impression from your post at all.

I probably should start a new post on the topic, classifying programs and their results is a subject I find very interesting. Especially on this forum because people are coming to TB from a wide variety of fitness backgrounds (ultra runners, strength athletes, MMA, etc.) so I think it would make for an extremely interesting discussion.

[Barkadion]

Are you sure about that? Are these programs complete:

Korte 3x3 (produced multiple world IPF champs in PL'ng, consists of only SQ-BP-DL)
Faleev 80/20 (SQ-BP-DL)

Or for another angle:

Russian Bear
Power to the People
Simple and Sinister (2 exercises only! No legs?)

Now you did say "it depends on what you want out of it", so obviously you get that it depends on your goals. So purely for (an interesting) discussion's sake, I'd like to get a little more in-depth into what "complete" means in terms of programming.

My point is that specific programs have specific goals. A marathon runner reading Joel Jamieson's Ultimate MMA Conditioning book would no doubt claim it's base building/running component was incomplete because it lacks the depth and specificity a marathon runner's base building might contain. Yet it's used by his UFC fighters, who are some of the most well-conditioned athletes in the octagon (Mighty Mouse for example). So there's obviously more than enough cardio in his program for the job.

Likewise someone coming from a world of strength books authored by powerlifters might think the strength training contained in Ross Enamait's books are inadequate because they're judging it from a strength-only point of view. They would probably fall ill reading Simple and Sinister. Yet how many competitive boxers and serious combat athletes follow an in-depth strength training program like Texas Method? Can they do a specialist strength program and still remain competitive?

TB isn't in the same category as 5/3/1 or SS, it's more like a very advanced Crossfit that actually does what Crossfit was supposed to do (make you good at everything) for occupational fitness. Whereas Crossfit uses a random nonsensical approach and fails at maximum-strength and aerobic-endurance, TB has that covered to a much greater degree. TB will get you to that "500 deadlift with the ability to pick up and run a half-marathon" as commonly touted. Good luck getting there with Crossfit (I tried). Starting Strength + Texas Method might get you to a 700-800lb deadlift etc. but not much else.

Posters comparing TB or other programs with programs that are about strength-ONLY are coming in with an inaccurate paradigm. TB isn't for the Starting Strength/Texas Method crowd, marathon runners or gymnasts. It's for tactical professionals that have to be good at everything, a unique category in it's own right. "Tactical professional" is a large category though. You're talking anything from Navy SEAL to traffic cop. TB allows for great variation along that wide spectrum. A Navy SEAL can't train like a traffic cop, and a traffic cop doesn't need to train like a SEAL. Both can use the variations in TB programming to come up with the appropriate personal protocol.

Apologies for the super long post, this is an area of discussion I enjoy, and I've seen it come up a few times. Mostly from posters trying to mentally shelve TB alongside Starting Strength,531, or PL programs, rather than where it belongs.

My main point is that no program can accomplish everything at once, so the OP should prioritise his goals and make sacrifices where necessary. TB works because it doesn't have you do everything at once like Crossfit. You build a base (which requires sacrificing strength work for a while), and then add on from there. If you are a powerlifter and your goal is to be good at the squat, bench and deadlift, then doing only the squat, bench and deadlift may well be a complete program for you. But if you want a bigger chest and shoulders, on top of also squatting and doing WPU, and you only have 3 exercises to work with, then something is going to have to be (temporarily) sacrificed. People's goals are always in flux, and reading this forum you will see that everyone is constantly making slight changes and corrections to balance things out (switching exercises, doing a little more/less volume, etc) If there were such a thing as a complete program then everybody would be on it and we wouldn't need this forum to discuss different approaches.

I wasn't trying to compare TB to SS or anything else, my point was that 3 exercises will not give you complete coverage of everything, so you should be making occasional corrections for balance. This is fine, and is not bashing TB. In fact, the flexibility of TB is what drew me to it in the first place. If you want a bigger chest and shoulders, you can swap out WPU or squats for a block or two to bring up those areas. In my case, I've been doing OHP/WCU/TBDL for the past year and a half. It has been great for strength gains, but has done nothing to fix my poor computer posture from years of sitting around, in fact it has probably made it worse (chins aren't a great pull to balance things out with, as the lats internally rotate the shoulder). Clearly this isn't a complete program for me. If I switched to something like SS, it wouldn't be complete either, as it isn't designed to address my particular weaknesses and will probably lead me to an eventual injury. So for a few blocks I will cut down or cut out the things that are making the problem worse or have an injury potential (chins, OHP) and switch to something that will correct it (rows and more rows). Clearly this isn't a complete program either, since I'm neglecting fundamental movement patterns, but it's what I need for the moment. Everyone has different weaknesses and different starting points, so a cookie cutter program will never be complete. But that is where the strength of TB lies - it is close to complete in the long term. And this is because you can make constant adjustments every few weeks to bring up your weak areas. If you tried to train like a powerlifter, a bodybuilder and a marathon runner all at once you will crash and burn. But if you build a strength base, then maintain that strength while bringing up your endurance/conditioning and making constant adjustments along the way to hold everything in balance, that is as close to complete as can be.

I hope this made sense, it's 4AM here.

Great post, makes total sense. Apologies, it wasn't my intention to come across like you were bashing TB and I didn't get that impression from your post at all.

I probably should start a new post on the topic, classifying programs and their results is a subject I find very interesting. Especially on this forum because people are coming to TB from a wide variety of fitness backgrounds (ultra runners, strength athletes, MMA, etc.) so I think it would make for an extremely interesting discussion.

Please start new post. It will be great thread!

[lennarn]

Thanks to Aelian & Stechkin for the super insightful posts!

It would seem the bench does more overall (...) than the OHP, but the OHP does more for just the shoulders in particular.

I have to disagree here; depending on how you do the OHP you can get a lot of core work from stabilization, lats included here also.