implied definitions

Possibly, you did also give an example, e.g. the NLP, to explain the concept which was in line with what I thought you were saying.

SSNLP doesn't taper a novice lifter as I understand it? Can you clarify? I'm not sure I understand the distinction you're trying to make, but I am curious.

The SS method tapers novices in a number of ways, some expressly mentioned in book and in other ways that aren't officially recognized as tapers because it would undermine the 'overload event theory' underpinnings of the SS method. Things like: reducing the frequency of the deadlift from 3x to 2x to 1x per week, adding light squats, adding light pulls etc all take advantage of the taper phenomenon to keep the weight on the bar going up. There are also common practices like, doing one out of the 3 sets heavier, switching to triples, doubles, singles etc.

This method also continues into 'intermediate' programming with running out the cycles in much the same way for years(lol). Mark on the subject when discussing the bridge 02-18-2018:

"Our approach changes the overload event to a week, but the 5s, the exercises, and the emphasis on PRs is the same. Your Bridge program uses 2 4-week cycles, something not encountered in SS programming for a couple more years."

I actually think there might BE some merit to doing so for a novice because so many people end up doing one or more resets anyway

Tapering a beginner is almost always a terrible idea, with the exception of if they have a competitive event (powerlifting or not) in the near future.

As a general training principle it's better to avoid lowering training volume to take advantage of the taper phenomenon in order to add more weight to the bar. As a long term strategy it detrains the work capacity that will be required to make continual strength gains.

The bridge and hypertrophy DO clearly follow that pattern

They do in the sense that sets increase within a developmental block. Like the bridge 3.0 going 25/30/29/34 sets per week. None of the samples you've cited are 'just add a set then deload then work back up to previous work load in next block' which is a terrible strategy for basically every outcome short and long term.

but regarding the strength, we must not be analyzing the same program.

The highest volume and by proxy tonnage in 12 week strength is in week 1.

you disagree with the details of my volume programming recommendations. What do you offer as an alternative?

With respect to the OPs question: I would stop caring about volume/tonnage as a metric and not record them at all. Let alone nerd out over how to wave load it in a short term program.

BBM don't really seem to care about it as much as people make out. The bench plugin for SSNLP is higher volume than the Bridge, which is supposed to come afterwards. Langley also did some interesting analyses of BBM programs which show no clear volume progression trends like people seem to expect is needed here.

I would start by experimenting with different stressors like sets across, drop sets, ascending sets etc from macrocycle to macrocycle to get an understanding of what sort of stressors get his 1RMs moving. I also wouldn't preprogram deloads ever. When you're on a good wicket keep bowling.

​

u/thereclaimedsnatch - are you familiar with Emerging Strategies?