Are Bodypart Splits Useless?

[forbes]

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
forbes wrote:
working two jobs and going to school…no, i cant make it to the gym for an hour a day. thats un-bloody likely.

If you cannot find the time to put in the work then why are you arguing?

TBT may be the best choice in your situation, but it is not the best for people willing to put in the effort and do more.

[/quote]

im not arguing. i stated when i think TBT would be a viable option and when i think splits are a better one. thats it. i really didn’t say anything more than that.

and as for my training, its a mix of HIT and TBT. hit a muscle with few sets, but make thoses sets like hell to the body. and do those few sets on a more frequent basis. im not lazy, i train hard, i just cant make it to the gym more than you people.

and stop harping on CW. he’s a well respected man by all the authors on here, even our very own CT. they agree on 90% of everything. obviously, people have reported muscle and strength gains with his programs, so you can’t argue that. and last time i checked, he’s not the only one to recommend TBT (mike rousell, dan john, Eric Cressey, even CT at times).

[Professor_X]

[quote]BigE05 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
That quote in this thread is so ridiculous that I am surprised newbies are so backwards that they actually believe big muscles are built with MINIMAL effort.

On that point, to anyone just picking up a weight, no one gets muscular arms over 20" without putting in more time and effort than most on this site could ever put together in several years. The attempt to deny this should be laughed at and ridiculed…no matter who the fuck wrote the statement.
TBT 3X a week does not mean Minimal effort…Shit my DLs are still over 400 on my work sets…it just means instead of resting min and half between sets it means you will catch your breath from a set of DLs then to set of standing military press of 185…I hope that is not the preseption of the TBT as minimal effort…

[/quote]

It may not mean minimal effort, but when this mode of training has a personal trainer on this site acting as if it is BETTER then all other forms of training, expect for his own comments about big muscles requiring minimal training to build to be applied to his own philosophy.

The guys arguing this method the hardest in this thread are also the least developed and least willing to actually sacrifice much time to even reach a goal. In that aspect, it is most definitely appealing to those who only want to apply minimal effort. Are you not seeing that in this thread?

Most of the guys even running after TBT are little dudes who think they know better then EVERY competing bodybuilder on any stage anywhere.

[Professor_X]

[quote]pumped340 wrote:
Professor X wrote:

I personally don’t go searching for his articles so my only presentation of what he seems to be writing is when others quote him in other threads (and in that one thread where he debated with me but then threw a tantrum and had the whole thread removed). I haven’t seen a quote yet that sounded like it made much sense.

he actually had it deleted? Thats too bad i would have wanted to read that, was it also dealing with TBT vs. Splits?

[/quote]

Yes, specifically focusing on why he speaks on bodybuilding when he clearly knows so little about it.

He is the only author here who has responded like that when challenged.

[BigE05]

[quote]Professor X wrote:
It may not mean minimal effort, but when this mode of training has a personal trainer on this site acting as if it is BETTER then all other forms of training, expect for his own comments about big muscles requiring minimal training to build to be applied to his own philosophy.

The guys arguing this method the hardest in this thread are also the least developed and least willing to actually sacrifice much time to even reach a goal. In that aspect, it is most definitely appealing to those who only want to apply minimal effort. Are you not seeing that in this thread?

Most of the guys even running after TBT are little dudes who think they know better then EVERY competing bodybuilder on any stage anywhere.
[/quote]

I do see that little dudes thinking that because they see it writen by a couple of coaches and in the supplement catalogs called Muscle and fitness or Flex…with out drawing their own conclutions…I am on the same page as you X…

Do I believe that the TBT should be in the arsonal of a Bodybuider’s plan of attack? Yes. Am I saying that it is better than a split? NO What I am saying is that I would like to hear about a current Body builder tring a TBT 6 weeks out or even for 6 weeks after. I have not seen an artical on TBT for bodybuilding…as you see it writen for fighters and ohter athletes.

[Alquemist]

[quote]forbes wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
forbes wrote:
working two jobs and going to school…no, i cant make it to the gym for an hour a day. thats un-bloody likely.

If you cannot find the time to put in the work then why are you arguing?

TBT may be the best choice in your situation, but it is not the best for people willing to put in the effort and do more.

im not arguing. i stated when i think TBT would be a viable option and when i think splits are a better one. thats it. i really didn’t say anything more than that.

and as for my training, its a mix of HIT and TBT. hit a muscle with few sets, but make thoses sets like hell to the body. and do those few sets on a more frequent basis. im not lazy, i train hard, i just cant make it to the gym more than you people.

and stop harping on CW. he’s a well respected man by all the authors on here, even our very own CT. they agree on 90% of everything. obviously, people have reported muscle and strength gains with his programs, so you can’t argue that. and last time i checked, he’s not the only one to recommend TBT (mike rousell, dan john, Eric Cressey, even CT at times).[/quote]

If you would be doing a split you wouldnt need to be in the gym one hour a day. That’s more like e tbt workout where you are doing a bunch of very demanding exercises, getting exhausted, and taking lots of time.

Also, who gives a shit what some authors agree on? Seriously, I am not hating on those guys, and they are intelligent, but why take everything they say as gospel? The only guys I would actually pay to train me (because they look like bodybuilders and thats how I want to look) are CT and Poliquin. Both of them also prefer splits to full body.

[forbes]

CW isnt the only author i read or listen to. i disagree with some of his things, like “dont train to failure” and the like. but i do agree with some of the things he says as well.

plus CT happens to be my fav author. i listen to what he says every time he writes.

so then, what kind of slit then do you recommend will allow one to hit each muscle group sufficiently while allowing me to be in the gym 3x a week?

[Professor_X]

[quote]forbes wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
forbes wrote:
working two jobs and going to school…no, i cant make it to the gym for an hour a day. thats un-bloody likely.

If you cannot find the time to put in the work then why are you arguing?

TBT may be the best choice in your situation, but it is not the best for people willing to put in the effort and do more.

im not arguing. i stated when i think TBT would be a viable option and when i think splits are a better one. thats it. i really didn’t say anything more than that.

and as for my training, its a mix of HIT and TBT. hit a muscle with few sets, but make thoses sets like hell to the body. and do those few sets on a more frequent basis. im not lazy, i train hard, i just cant make it to the gym more than you people.

and stop harping on CW. he’s a well respected man by all the authors on here, even our very own CT. they agree on 90% of everything. obviously, people have reported muscle and strength gains with his programs, so you can’t argue that. and last time i checked, he’s not the only one to recommend TBT (mike rousell, dan john, Eric Cressey, even CT at times).[/quote]

The last thing most newbies need to be doing is focusing on what most of these authors have to say. You don’t know enough from personal experience to know the bullshit from the truth…which is why you actually thought that quote made sense.

The name dropping doesn’t mean much to people who are more advanced. I don’t change what I am doing based on the article of the week.

[DoubleDuce]

I think its funny the people arguing against simply writing off splits, simply write off tbt training. You can absolutely get big and strong doing a version of tbt. Look at anyone in a strongman competition, are they big and strong? Yes. From what I�??ve read (articles and interviews) virtually all successful strongmen use what I would consider tbt.

That being said, this a bodybuilding forum, would a strongman physic do well in bodybuilding? No. (unless maybe you are Pudzianowski, where is rainjack anyway?) In my opinion, if you want to look like a bodybuilder, your best shot is to train like virtually all the successful ones do. But, if you just want to get big and strong, there are other options.

[Professor_X]

[quote]forbes wrote:
CW isnt the only author i read or listen to. i disagree with some of his things, like “dont train to failure” and the like. but i do agree with some of the things he says as well.

plus CT happens to be my fav author. i listen to what he says every time he writes.

so then, what kind of slit then do you recommend will allow one to hit each muscle group sufficiently while allowing me to be in the gym 3x a week? [/quote]

This is a bodybuilding forum. The goal is not to find a routine that only has you in the gym 3 times a week. the goal is to do what actually works. If that happens to be 3 times a week, so be it.

You have already stated that you don’t plan to put any more time into it even if it needed it. You are not cut out for this.

Sorry.

[Professor_X]

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I think its funny the people arguing against simply writing off splits, simply write off tbt training. You can absolutely get big and strong doing a version of tbt. Look at anyone in a strongman competition, are they big and strong? Yes. From what I�??ve read (articles and interviews) virtually all successful strongmen use what I would consider tbt.

That being said, this a bodybuilding forum, would a strongman physic do well in bodybuilding? No. (unless maybe you are Pudzianowski, where is rainjack anyway?) In my opinion, if you want to look like a bodybuilder, your best shot is to train like virtually all the successful ones do. But, if you just want to get big and strong, there are other options.
[/quote]

Pud does biceps curls…and quite a lot of them. Most of the largest bodybuilders currently competing also trained as powerlifters. To call that “TBT”, however, is a little careless.

Name one exercise that is done using TBT that is avoided while doing a body part split routine.

[DoubleDuce]

[quote]Professor X wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
I think its funny the people arguing against simply writing off splits, simply write off tbt training. You can absolutely get big and strong doing a version of tbt. Look at anyone in a strongman competition, are they big and strong? Yes. From what I�??ve read (articles and interviews) virtually all successful strongmen use what I would consider tbt.

That being said, this a bodybuilding forum, would a strongman physic do well in bodybuilding? No. (unless maybe you are Pudzianowski, where is rainjack anyway?) In my opinion, if you want to look like a bodybuilder, your best shot is to train like virtually all the successful ones do. But, if you just want to get big and strong, there are other options.

Pud does biceps curls…and quite a lot of them. Most of the largest bodybuilders currently competing also trained as powerlifters. To call that “TBT”, however, is a little careless.

Name one exercise that is done using TBT that is avoided while doing a body part split routine.[/quote]

I never said splits avoided any exercise, I also didn’t think you couldn’t do curls in a tbt program. Pudz., does have some great arms though, in one article he claimed to do 305 barbell curls for 5 reps.

As for powerlifting, I would still consider it closer to tbt than to the more bodybuilding style, once a week, split.

However, sense we are talking strongmen, they do a lot of total body exercises most don’t do (tires, farmers walk, est.).

I also don’t know many bodybuilding programs that use much in the way of cleans, olympic lifts, sled pulling, est.

[Professor_X]

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Professor X wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
I think its funny the people arguing against simply writing off splits, simply write off tbt training. You can absolutely get big and strong doing a version of tbt. Look at anyone in a strongman competition, are they big and strong? Yes. From what I�??ve read (articles and interviews) virtually all successful strongmen use what I would consider tbt.

That being said, this a bodybuilding forum, would a strongman physic do well in bodybuilding? No. (unless maybe you are Pudzianowski, where is rainjack anyway?) In my opinion, if you want to look like a bodybuilder, your best shot is to train like virtually all the successful ones do. But, if you just want to get big and strong, there are other options.

Pud does biceps curls…and quite a lot of them. Most of the largest bodybuilders currently competing also trained as powerlifters. To call that “TBT”, however, is a little careless.

Name one exercise that is done using TBT that is avoided while doing a body part split routine.

I never said splits avoided any exercise, I also didn’t think you couldn’t do curls in a tbt program. Pudz., does have some great arms though, in one article he claimed to do 305 barbell curls for 5 reps.

As for powerlifting, I would still consider it closer to tbt than to the more bodybuilding style, once a week, split.

However, sense we are talking strongmen, they do a lot of total body exercises most don’t do (tires, farmers walk, est.).

I also don’t know many bodybuilding programs that use much in the way of cleans, olympic lifts, sled pulling, est.
[/quote]

I trained like a powerlifter for two years and we still did body part splits. The ONLY difference was the attempt at one rep maxes and longer rest periods. Where are you all getting this concept that powerlifting equals “TBT” and other forms ignore training for strength?

[jehovasfitness]

[quote]forbes wrote:
CW isnt the only author i read or listen to. i disagree with some of his things, like “dont train to failure” and the like. but i do agree with some of the things he says as well.

plus CT happens to be my fav author. i listen to what he says every time he writes.

so then, what kind of slit then do you recommend will allow one to hit each muscle group sufficiently while allowing me to be in the gym 3x a week? [/quote]

Chest, Back, Legs

if you have a little extra time each day add in one arm exercise for that day, and maybe abs on leg day.

[DoubleDuce]

[quote]Professor X wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
Professor X wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
I think its funny the people arguing against simply writing off splits, simply write off tbt training. You can absolutely get big and strong doing a version of tbt. Look at anyone in a strongman competition, are they big and strong? Yes. From what I�??ve read (articles and interviews) virtually all successful strongmen use what I would consider tbt.

That being said, this a bodybuilding forum, would a strongman physic do well in bodybuilding? No. (unless maybe you are Pudzianowski, where is rainjack anyway?) In my opinion, if you want to look like a bodybuilder, your best shot is to train like virtually all the successful ones do. But, if you just want to get big and strong, there are other options.

Pud does biceps curls…and quite a lot of them. Most of the largest bodybuilders currently competing also trained as powerlifters. To call that “TBT”, however, is a little careless.

Name one exercise that is done using TBT that is avoided while doing a body part split routine.

I never said splits avoided any exercise, I also didn’t think you couldn’t do curls in a tbt program. Pudz., does have some great arms though, in one article he claimed to do 305 barbell curls for 5 reps.

As for powerlifting, I would still consider it closer to tbt than to the more bodybuilding style, once a week, split.

However, sense we are talking strongmen, they do a lot of total body exercises most don’t do (tires, farmers walk, est.).

I also don’t know many bodybuilding programs that use much in the way of cleans, olympic lifts, sled pulling, est.

I trained like a powerlifter for two years and we still did body part splits. The ONLY difference was the attempt at one rep maxes and longer rest periods. Where are you all getting this concept that powerlifting equals “TBT” and other forms ignore training for strength?

[/quote]

First, I admit powerlifting is not TBT, I never brought up powerlifting. I also never said you can’t get strong with splits.

I do think exercise selection and frequency (of training a muscle group) are more different between powerlifting and bodybuilding than you are admitting. Though its a mute point because we both agree, powerlifters don’t generally train tbt.

[jp_dubya]

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
jp_dubya wrote:
seems like quite a few here are representing their opinion as fact. A few have the experience to back up their statements. Has anyone changed their mind since reading through this and perhaps the other 1 or 2, MAYBE MORE threads on this topic?

I haven’t seen too many people change their minds due to other peoples’ arguments, whether that be on internet forums or face to face.

But what can you do… The debate is going on for the umpteenth time and beginners may read this.

I’m hoping that the prevalence of big guys who do splits will make something click in their heads.[/quote]

Well here is a monkey wrench. The absolute biggest and strongest guy I know does a modified whole body workout every other day. He does something for ever action. upper pull, upper push. lower quad, lower ham. I asked him, just in case “have you always trained like this?” him, “no, but I haven’t always trained like anything”, he is a log book guy. Just big lifts. haven’t seen him in a few years…

[Sagat]

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I think its funny the people arguing against simply writing off splits, simply write off tbt training. You can absolutely get big and strong doing a version of tbt. Look at anyone in a strongman competition, are they big and strong? Yes. From what I�??ve read (articles and interviews) virtually all successful strongmen use what I would consider tbt.

That being said, this a bodybuilding forum, would a strongman physic do well in bodybuilding? No. (unless maybe you are Pudzianowski, where is rainjack anyway?) In my opinion, if you want to look like a bodybuilder, your best shot is to train like virtually all the successful ones do. But, if you just want to get big and strong, there are other options.
[/quote]

I agree with you. And when you actually try both methods you see that they arent that different in practice (for most people).

[Professor_X]

[quote]jp_dubya wrote:
Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
jp_dubya wrote:
seems like quite a few here are representing their opinion as fact. A few have the experience to back up their statements. Has anyone changed their mind since reading through this and perhaps the other 1 or 2, MAYBE MORE threads on this topic?

I haven’t seen too many people change their minds due to other peoples’ arguments, whether that be on internet forums or face to face.

But what can you do… The debate is going on for the umpteenth time and beginners may read this.

I’m hoping that the prevalence of big guys who do splits will make something click in their heads.

Well here is a monkey wrench. The absolute biggest and strongest guy I know does a modified whole body workout every other day. He does something for ever action. upper pull, upper push. lower quad, lower ham. I asked him, just in case “have you always trained like this?” him, “no, but I haven’t always trained like anything”, he is a log book guy. Just big lifts. haven’t seen him in a few years… [/quote]

The problem here is you are speaking for someone who you have rarely seen. The fact that he told you he didn’t always train like that should throw off sparks in your mind instead of simply focusing on what he was doing at that moment.

The more interesting question for you to have asked is, “WHAT THE FUCK DID YOU DO TO GET TO THAT SIZE IN THE FIRST DAMN PLACE”, not “what are you doing right now”. There are bodybuilders competing at over 260lbs in the Olympia who claim they won’t bulk up now…while completely leaving out that they were over 300lbs when they built the majority of that mass and bulking up was how that came about.

Way too many ignore what they actually did to build all of that size just to focus in on what they see at that very moment.

[austin_bicep]

[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
forbes wrote:
CW isnt the only author i read or listen to. i disagree with some of his things, like “dont train to failure” and the like. but i do agree with some of the things he says as well.

plus CT happens to be my fav author. i listen to what he says every time he writes.

so then, what kind of slit then do you recommend will allow one to hit each muscle group sufficiently while allowing me to be in the gym 3x a week?

Chest, Back, Legs

if you have a little extra time each day add in one arm exercise for that day, and maybe abs on leg day.[/quote]

That approach is o.k., but I’m a strong advocate that you need plenty of direct arm work to develop stage quality arms.

[derek]

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Way too many ignore what they actually did to build all of that size just to focus in on what they see at that very moment.[/quote]

Yeah, there’s a lot of that going around. And when directly questioned about it the story changes. A lot.

[Protoculture]

[quote]Sagat wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
I think its funny the people arguing against simply writing off splits, simply write off tbt training. You can absolutely get big and strong doing a version of tbt. Look at anyone in a strongman competition, are they big and strong? Yes. From what I�??ve read (articles and interviews) virtually all successful strongmen use what I would consider tbt.

That being said, this a bodybuilding forum, would a strongman physic do well in bodybuilding? No. (unless maybe you are Pudzianowski, where is rainjack anyway?) In my opinion, if you want to look like a bodybuilder, your best shot is to train like virtually all the successful ones do. But, if you just want to get big and strong, there are other options.

I agree with you. And when you actually try both methods you see that they arent that different in practice (for most people).
[/quote]

You are correct in that if we look at a long enough time line, for example one week instead of comparing individual session, that there isn’t a huge difference in volume on the basic “compound” lifts (bench press, squats, rows, chins).

Ultimately where I do think the difference lies is that trainees who use split routines still put in more time and therefore have the option to attend to lagging muscle groups or movements, if you prefer. If you’ll allow me to make a generalization Split Trainees often train 5-6 times per week for about 1 hour, so 5-6 hours per week.

Full body trainees usually train 3 times per week also for about an hour (if I were to guesstimate based on the volume I’ve seen prescribed for these programs), so 3 hours per week. That does leave them much wiggle room to work on their smaller weaker links that may require specialized isolation exercises to get them caught up to speed.

Sure, I guess you can make the argument that you can TBT 3 times per week for 2 hours per session and that would match the 5-6 hours on a split routine and allow specialization exercises; BUT if you are willing to invest 6 hours per week you’d still most likely benefit for splitting your TBT into half and going to the gym 6 times per week.

I can’t imagine the exercises in the second half of such a marathon session receiving optimal effort as when compared to doing them on a separate day when you’re still fresh.

And for the record I do believe TBT is a valid training concept for some people, I just don’t think it’s the best for those who are experienced and who have made training a “priority” (in the true sense of the word).