Hi Joao
This is a good plan, as good as the first. You can go with both, I recommend the second one a bit more but basically I would not do both of them for me (and me only!), but I think I have to explain why. You should NOT think your plans are bad and mine are better for whatever reason.
I follow a particular nitpickers approach to PE. I try to isolate every new routine I do from the previous one and only on proven gain exhaustion. The idea behind is to find as precisely possible root-cause relations. This is only possible if there is a single and isolated change in parameters, not several changes at the same time. And I try to be patient by measuring once a month and giving at least a reserve month for giving proof of measurements.
I give you a simple (and unrealistic!!!) example:
Routine 1 consists of whacking my penis with a hammer 1 time every second day (single parameter). In the first month, my penis grows 0.25”. In the second zero (suspicion of no gain). In the third, again zero inches (proof of no gain). I decide then to switch to caressing my penis every second day (frequency parameter remains constant!) with a silk scarf for 5 minutes (single parameter changed: the method). After 1 month, my penis has grown 0.1”, after 2 months 0.2”, after 3 months I gained overall additional 0.32”. Therefore, as I changed only one parameter if the routine, there is a high probability of proof that the hammer-whacking method did not work and the silk-scarf-method is working. I happily conclude I better keep the silk-scarf method.
Routine 2 consists of whacking my penis with a hammer 1 time every second day (single parameter). In the first month, my penis grows 0.25”. In the second zero (suspicion of no gain). In the third, again zero inches (proof of no gain). I decide then to switch to whacking my penis with the hammer two times (parameter 1 changed: modification of intensity) and then caress if with the silk scarf for 5 minutes (parameter 2 changed: new method introduced) and do it on a daily base (parameter 3 changed: increase of frequency). Whatever I will measure in the next month, I will not be able to trace it to the source because I changed three different parameters at the same time.
I guess you see what I mean by trying to do isolated changes in routine. I absolutely admit it’s a really “purist” or maybe even a bit “theoretical” approach to PE, but I am a patient man. I have by far more seniority as TP reader than as PE practitioner, as I had quite a long break in the last years.
But I was still reading through TP threads during that break and I came to this method. It’s based on my observation of multiple progress and injury reports where PE-brothers gained or failed or were struggling without really being able to identify the good or the bad parameters in their routines. And I admit I have some academic background and this idea follows a basic principle of scientific research.
I cannot guarantee success, but I think the probability of clear feedback and linking the actions to the results should make the personal routine more successful in the medium and long term, independent of the method of PE.
OK, that was a bit of theory, but it had to be said on that occasion.
Have great gains and go for it!
Richard65
PS: please forget the hammer-whacking method immediately! It is NOT working! But maybe I should try the silk scarf… :-)