I had a few manuels from the ussr days that were translated to English. They were killer. The had tons of diet and routine advice and had the scientific reasons for doing so. Anyway, my wife thought they were just piles of old paper and tossed them. I've been googling for days and can't find them. Anyone have an idea where I can find something along the lines? 
Names of said super soviet swole beast manuals?
I don't recall, they were from the coach of the wrestling olympic team. I spent hours googling to no avail
http://doctoryessis.com/ - Michael Yessis is a biomechanist responsible for translating the majority of russian language training literature during the 60s through early 90s.
Zatsiorsky's "science and practice of strength training" is a classic textbook on the science of sport preparation through strength training derived from the "soviet" methods.
It does not contain cookie cutter routines though- it's more a book about the how's and why's. Not recommended as a first read however.
I've never understood the fascination with Russian training methods.
In the mass media the Russians are portayed as being high-tech and scientific in there secret training labs. The truth is the opposite. Low tech tools, low-tech methods, consistent hard work on the basics, combined with masterful sport specific skills practice.
Michael Yessis was literally translating (or attemnptng to) Russian texts using a Russian-to-English dictionary. He didb't speak Russian. His books (from what I've read) are nothing much to bother with.
Zatsiorsky's "science and practice of strength training" is a solid book. but as Herts said above, it's an information book, not a "Nuts & Bolts" training routine book.
Just my two cents.
TAKU
Taku, Yessis is a sports biomechanist and coach; hence he was able to properly interperet the material and context VS a translator with no background in exercise.
Mel Siff and Zatsiorsky had more respect for Yessis, than you do.
If you have most native english speakers peruse a peer reviewed exercise or medical journal study, many words will appear as a foreign language to them.
Taku, do you have any specific examples of Yessis doing poor translation, something russian sport scientist authors haven't recognized ?
I will say I haven't read any of his books, but when I participated on the Supertraining discussion list, his contributions were solid and he was well respected by the community.
Hey HERTS.
Two-three times I've tried to answer your questions...My computer was recently "upgraded" to WINDOWS 10 (don't do it people) and has been giving me trouble ever since. I lost the last few attempts somehow. I'll try again when I am not frustrated by my struggles with technology.
TAKU
Dr.Yessis books are very good.
Also Yessis DOES know the language. I believe he is a son of Russian immigrants; he spoke the language at home. He has several YouTube videos where he serves as a live translator for Bondachuk.
Taku -That is why I like them. They are simple and based off of percentages. You just need a rack, bar, kettlebells.
I've never understood the fascination with Russian training methods.
In the mass media the Russians are portayed as being high-tech and scientific in there secret training labs. The truth is the opposite. Low tech tools, low-tech methods, consistent hard work on the basics, combined with masterful sport specific skills practice.
Michael Yessis was literally translating (or attemnptng to) Russian texts using a Russian-to-English dictionary. He didb't speak Russian. His books (from what I've read) are nothing much to bother with.
Zatsiorsky's "science and practice of strength training" is a solid book. but as Herts said above, it's an information book, not a "Nuts & Bolts" training routine book.
Just my two cents.
TAKU
Taku -
I've never understood the fascination with Russian training methods.
In the mass media the Russians are portayed as being high-tech and scientific in there secret training labs. The truth is the opposite. Low tech tools, low-tech methods, consistent hard work on the basics, combined with masterful sport specific skills practice.
Michael Yessis was literally translating (or attemnptng to) Russian texts using a Russian-to-English dictionary. He didb't speak Russian. His books (from what I've read) are nothing much to bother with.
Zatsiorsky's "science and practice of strength training" is a solid book. but as Herts said above, it's an information book, not a "Nuts & Bolts" training routine book.
Just my two cents.
TAKU
I would also disagree with"low-tech methods" - russians created the concept of periodization, and in its time the planned variations in training, and specific modulation in intensity and trainig variables was rather sophisticated.
I know that you are an HIT advocate, you do not believe in periodization, and prefer methods that no olympic level athlete uses, hence you have historically expressed disdain for any method that involves periodization, trainig a muscle group or movement more than once a week, more than one warmup set, or more than 1-2 work sets.
(this does raise the question though- do you think a given olympic team would have better results if Darden, mentzer, Yates or another HIT representative ran the strength programs?)
Hey HERTS,
Since it's been raised, I'll address it briefly but do not intend to get into a long drawn out discussion about my personal preferences in training.
While it's true that I prefer not to use OSW training methods most of the time, the truth is I have a background in Olympic lifting myself,. I first learned to use O-lifits during an extended certification workshop with the NSCA back in the late 1980's. I am certified Sports Performance coach with USAW and happen to spend time with my coach (Jim Schmitz) literally every week.
I also understand, and have used periodization methods extensively in my career. I read, studied, and untilzed the methods of Bompa (among others) for quite some time.
My personal expeience has been that for most athletic endeveours peridozation is not required nor does it produce superior results. This does not mean I do not use variety in volume, frequency, intensity etc (I do) I just have no need to worry about using exact and specific % because I feel thay are of little value.
PAU for NOW (on that)
TAKU
P.S. More on your other question (Re: Darden, Mentzer, Yates etc) later.
Since this thread is about Russian (Soviet) training methods I think it is important to note that although the Soviets have been credited with create periodization the concept was NOT accepted by every Soviet sport coach.
Noted author and coach, Vershonsky, was not a big advocate or fan of periodization.
Furthermore, the concept of periodization was highly varied among the sports coaches of the Soviet Union. The model which is commonly used in the U.S was based on one coach (Mateyev).
Also the training methods of the former Soviet Union went well-beyond just fitness or exercise science. This is something many American S&C coaches who have heard about and are interested in Russian/Soviet training methods don't understand. Many of the training methods developed by Russian/Soviet coaches were very specific to their sport. For example most of the training methods of wrestlers of the Soviet Union were more or less specialized wrestling techniques, tactic and movements .
taku, thanks for sharing, not a fan of bompa's his material is outdated imo. Im still interested in hearing why Yessis sucks in your opinion.
mg, Im not familiar with Vershonsky, did you mean verkhoshansky?
If it was the latter, Verkhoshansky co authored supertraining with siff, and I believe he contributed some significant material on periodization as well not even including the inclusion of shock training. (I cannot specifically recall which chapters, as I have had my exercise science books locked up in storage out of state for over 10 years).
Re: matveyev's model, yes it was more commonly used in previous decades, not so much anymore though- its outdated.
Agreed in the latter points; the depth and thoroughness of the research soviet era sports machine was unparalleled with the govt sponsorship. This is why I disagreed with taku when he said their methods are "low tech" because they didnt rely on fancy nautilus machines with sets done to failure.
Hey HERTS...I don't think I actually ever said that he (Yessis) SUCKS.
I just didn't find anything of value in the books of his I read. Transparently I probably read them many years ago..I certainly do not own any now.( I have bought-sold-gifted & traded tons of the books over the years.)
As far as your question re: Darden, Mentzer, Yates...I really don't know the answer.
I have met Darden on several occasions and I have also had phone conversations with Mentzer (R.I.P.) He (Darden) seems like a man stuck in place. He is a very sharp guy, but he still clings to the "Letter of the Law" (with respect to Arthur Jones and his methods).
Mentzer became more and more dogmatic (it appeared) as he quested for the least possible amount of exercise required to produce a result. Not a bad quest in my mind. But he to seemed a bit stuck in the end.
BTW,,,I was certainly not implying that NAUTILUS (or it's associated methods) were high-tech as compared to anything else. Arthur Jones was a traditional strength training guy for years. He was only trying to improve upon what he felt were shortcomings of the barbell.
More soon.
TAKU
You guys know your stuff. Fuck the manuals I'm trying to find. What do you guys suggest I read for a hypertrophy program?
Hey HERTS,
RE: Your Question about low volume, High Intensity strength training and Weight lifting competition, Here is some info from one of Arthur Jones books:
Taken from My First Half Century in the Iron Game, Chapter 36
"Prior to the time that Cybex started putting the knock on the negative part of exercise, I had never given the subject anything apart from casual consideration; I was aware of it, but did not ever really consider its benefits or problems. I had no opinion on the subject, did knot know if it was good or bad. But I knew how to find out: and we did find out by conducting very careful and large-scale research with what we then called “negative-only” exercise. During which research project the subjects performed ONLY NEGATIVE WORK, performed no positive exercise of any kind.
The results? Without exception, the subjects gained both muscular size and strength so fast that we could hardly believe it. Then, having seen the results that we produced from this negative-only exercise, coach Bill Bradford of the DeLand, Florida, Highschool started a weightlifting team at the high school level.
During the next seven years of competition his team was undefeated and untied, won a total of more than 100 weightlifting meets, were state champions every year for seven years. And how did he train his lifters? *Negative-only, what else?
Bradford’s record is probably unprecedented in the history of sports. But, then, how many other weightlifting coaches copied his training methods? None. In spite of the fact that he beat them like a drum for seven years they were never smart enough to copy his methods. So much for common sense."
*TAKU's Note:
He trained them using a single set to failure, Negative only protocol, outside of the specific practice of the compstitive lifts themselves. It's my understanding that they focused primarily on strength, and then practiced the specific lifts more frequently only for a few weeks before each contest.
Also, I don't believe that the weightlifting competitions were pure OSW. I think it was sort of a combination of Power Lifitng & O-Lifting. I know they did Bench Press as well as the Clean & Jerk.
Taku -
Hey HERTS,
RE: Your Question about low volume, High Intensity strength training and Weight lifting competition, Here is some info from one of Arthur Jones books:
Taken from My First Half Century in the Iron Game, Chapter 36
"Prior to the time that Cybex started putting the knock on the negative part of exercise, I had never given the subject anything apart from casual consideration; I was aware of it, but did not ever really consider its benefits or problems. I had no opinion on the subject, did knot know if it was good or bad. But I knew how to find out: and we did find out by conducting very careful and large-scale research with what we then called “negative-only” exercise. During which research project the subjects performed ONLY NEGATIVE WORK, performed no positive exercise of any kind.
The results? Without exception, the subjects gained both muscular size and strength so fast that we could hardly believe it. Then, having seen the results that we produced from this negative-only exercise, coach Bill Bradford of the DeLand, Florida, Highschool started a weightlifting team at the high school level.
During the next seven years of competition his team was undefeated and untied, won a total of more than 100 weightlifting meets, were state champions every year for seven years. And how did he train his lifters? *Negative-only, what else?
Bradford’s record is probably unprecedented in the history of sports. But, then, how many other weightlifting coaches copied his training methods? None. In spite of the fact that he beat them like a drum for seven years they were never smart enough to copy his methods. So much for common sense."
*TAKU's Note:
He trained them using a single set to failure, Negative only protocol, outside of the specific practice of the compstitive lifts themselves. It's my understanding that they focused primarily on strength, and then practiced the specific lifts more frequently only for a few weeks before each contest.
Also, I don't believe that the weightlifting competitions were pure OSW. I think it was sort of a combination of Power Lifitng & O-Lifting. I know they did Bench Press as well as the Clean & Jerk.
I wouldn't give much credence to anythign that came out of Arthur Jones' mouth, given that his example is only hearsay and not verifiable under controlled conditions.
Additionally, the results of his alleged anecdote have been irreproducable in all peer reviewed research from scholarly references contrasting the strength adaptations of combined eccentric-concentric training, and eccentric only.
If the results were reproducable, don't you think every team and most athletes would be using this method? Or is it just a well kept training secret?
Fourth, how do you train an O-lift eccentric-only? The technical nature of it does not make it practical. Is he claiming they used nautilus for eccentric only training, and only did the O-lifts in competition?
Fifth, this has no pertinence to your insinuation that Dr. Yessis did poor translation of russian literature, I was hoping you could elucidate this manner by sharing specific examples what your keen russian speaking eyes caught in his mistranslations, that all the russian sport scientists missed.