[quote]trextacy wrote:
that is not what I wrote.
[/quote]
It is what you implied by even mentioning it along with split routines.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
trextacy wrote:
that is not what I wrote.
It is what you implied by even mentioning it along with split routines. [/quote]
As I mentioned before (there is a lag so you may have not seen it), but “may work particularly well” does not say or even imply that anabolics are “needed” for splits to work. now, how about the rest of the post?
[quote]trextacy wrote:
Professor X wrote:
trextacy wrote:
as i’ve stated, splits may work particularly well when anabolics are used.
The fact that you believe anabolics are needed to make splits work is what discredits everything else you type.
that is not what I wrote. as indignant and self righteous as you are, you’d think you would read, think and type more carefully. i’m not trying to get into a pissing match, but the barage of bullshit is stifling any semblance of a decent discussion. i’m trying to discuss training methods and support the position that full body workouts 3x per week are good at building muscle mass and are particularly appropriate for newbs and intermediate lifters, while splits are best utilized by people who have “outgrown” other methods or are using assistance (since the damage to the muscle is so severe).
what pro bodybuilders do is take a fair amount of illegal drugs and hormones and train using split routines. if you can get mad arm growth training them once per week rather than 3, then that’s what people will do because it’s easier. that full body workouts are harder to do with intensity is a no brainer.
…
[/quote]
This is backwards. Pro BB’s use steroids to recover faster. They train harder with more volume using splits 5 days a week than other people do who train 3 days a week.
The fact that people buy into the BS that 3 is more than 5 boggles my mind.
[quote]trextacy wrote:
Professor X wrote:
trextacy wrote:
that is not what I wrote.
It is what you implied by even mentioning it along with split routines.
As I mentioned before (there is a lag so you may have not seen it), but “may work particularly well” does not say or even imply that anabolics are “needed” for splits to work. now, how about the rest of the post?[/quote]
Wait, are you really going to try to act as if “[quote]splits may work particularly well when anabolics are used[/quote]” does NOT imply that anabolics are need to do well on a split routine? Why the fuck else would you construct a sentence like that?
You would get more respect if you didn’t backtrack like this.
[quote]trextacy wrote:
This isn’t about CW. In the least. Straw men are so much easier to debate than real ones.
…[/quote]
And yet you use all his talking points.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
trextacy wrote:
Professor X wrote:
trextacy wrote:
as i’ve stated, splits may work particularly well when anabolics are used.
The fact that you believe anabolics are needed to make splits work is what discredits everything else you type.
that is not what I wrote. as indignant and self righteous as you are, you’d think you would read, think and type more carefully. i’m not trying to get into a pissing match, but the barage of bullshit is stifling any semblance of a decent discussion. i’m trying to discuss training methods and support the position that full body workouts 3x per week are good at building muscle mass and are particularly appropriate for newbs and intermediate lifters, while splits are best utilized by people who have “outgrown” other methods or are using assistance (since the damage to the muscle is so severe).
what pro bodybuilders do is take a fair amount of illegal drugs and hormones and train using split routines. if you can get mad arm growth training them once per week rather than 3, then that’s what people will do because it’s easier. that full body workouts are harder to do with intensity is a no brainer.
…
This is backwards. Pro BB’s use steroids to recover faster. They train harder with more volume using splits 5 days a week than other people do who train 3 days a week.
The fact that people buy into the BS that 3 is more than 5 boggles my mind.[/quote]
He thinks it’s “cutting edge” though.
Somehow, they have actually convinced themselves that bodybuilders are working with LESS intensity than they are.
Stupid just doesn’t describe this.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
pumped340 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Do you TBT-fans all think Ronnie Coleman isn’t following up his 800lbs squats with overhead presses because he’s lazy?
he follows it up with loads of other leg exerices which would be even more taxing so it’s not like he couldnt go with an overhead press. I’m sure you could figure that one out on your own, the same goes for chest and back workouts…you include many exercises that are just as taxing
Oh, OK…it isn’t like he actually feels the NEED to do those other leg exercises. he should just do overhead presses instead…because TBT is where it’s at (in cheerleader voice)![/quote]
you know my point is that clearly even after squats he can do other exercises. Your point before was that “theres a reason he doesnt do OH press after squatting 800lb” as if the squat was so taxing he couldnt. my point is he clearly could considering he follows it up with tons of exercises with the same, much bigger, muscle
honestly X you seem like an overall helpful guy who knows what he’s doing but anytime arguments like this come up you manipulate what people say.
[quote]pumped340 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
pumped340 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Do you TBT-fans all think Ronnie Coleman isn’t following up his 800lbs squats with overhead presses because he’s lazy?
he follows it up with loads of other leg exerices which would be even more taxing so it’s not like he couldnt go with an overhead press. I’m sure you could figure that one out on your own, the same goes for chest and back workouts…you include many exercises that are just as taxing
Oh, OK…it isn’t like he actually feels the NEED to do those other leg exercises. he should just do overhead presses instead…because TBT is where it’s at (in cheerleader voice)!
you know my point is that clearly even after squats he can do other exercises. Your point before was that “theres a reason he doesnt do OH press after squatting 800lb” as if the squat was so taxing he couldnt. my point is he clearly could considering he follows it up with tons of exercises with the same, much bigger, muscle
honestly X you seem like an overall helpful guy who knows what he’s doing but anytime arguments like this come up you manipulate what people say.
[/quote]
Are you really that slow? He does more exercises for legs…BECAUSE MORE EXERCISES FOR LEGS LEADS TO MORE RESULTS FOR LEGS.
That means way more results than worrying about fitting in more muscle groups for no reason.
We could ALL do a bunch of muscle groups every training session if we scaled back the intensity, the number of sets and the weight used.
WHY THE FUCK WOULD WE DO THIS???
[quote]Professor X wrote:
…
Somehow, they have actually convinced themselves that bodybuilders are working with LESS intensity than they are.
Stupid just doesn’t describe this.[/quote]
Sure the pros are taking steroids but they work hard as hell with incredible intensity.
It must be a sour grapes thing because no one can actually believe otherwise.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Are you really that slow? He does more exercises for legs…BECAUSE MORE EXERCISES FOR LEGS LEADS TO MORE RESULTS FOR LEGS.
That means way more results than worrying about fitting in more muscle groups for no reason.
We could ALL do a bunch of muscle groups every training session if we scaled back the intensity, the number of sets and the weight used.
WHY THE FUCK WOULD WE DO THIS???[/quote]
again…of course its necessary for someone of that level to do that for the best gains. I never said anything against that.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
trextacy wrote:
Professor X wrote:
trextacy wrote:
that is not what I wrote.
It is what you implied by even mentioning it along with split routines.
As I mentioned before (there is a lag so you may have not seen it), but “may work particularly well” does not say or even imply that anabolics are “needed” for splits to work. now, how about the rest of the post?
Wait, are you really going to try to act as if “splits may work particularly well when anabolics are used” does NOT imply that anabolics are need to do well on a split routine? Why the fuck else would you construct a sentence like that?
You would get more respect if you didn’t backtrack like this.[/quote]
It isn’t backtracking. Do you seriously not see how saying something may work particularly well under a set of circumstances is different than saying those circumstances are necessary? It’s a nuanced point, and I know you get it and why you are feigning ignorance is beyond me. I guess that’s better than addressing the rest of my post.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
trextacy wrote:
Professor X wrote:
trextacy wrote:
as i’ve stated, splits may work particularly well when anabolics are used.
The fact that you believe anabolics are needed to make splits work is what discredits everything else you type.
that is not what I wrote. as indignant and self righteous as you are, you’d think you would read, think and type more carefully. i’m not trying to get into a pissing match, but the barage of bullshit is stifling any semblance of a decent discussion. i’m trying to discuss training methods and support the position that full body workouts 3x per week are good at building muscle mass and are particularly appropriate for newbs and intermediate lifters, while splits are best utilized by people who have “outgrown” other methods or are using assistance (since the damage to the muscle is so severe).
what pro bodybuilders do is take a fair amount of illegal drugs and hormones and train using split routines. if you can get mad arm growth training them once per week rather than 3, then that’s what people will do because it’s easier. that full body workouts are harder to do with intensity is a no brainer.
…
This is backwards. Pro BB’s use steroids to recover faster. They train harder with more volume using splits 5 days a week than other people do who train 3 days a week.
The fact that people buy into the BS that 3 is more than 5 boggles my mind.[/quote]
Training a bodypart 3 times per week (each session) is more than training a bodyparty once per week. If this post reflects your understanding of the issues then you need to stop posting.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
One thing I know for sure is that if you can do all of that shit in only one training session jumping from legs to shoulders to chest while also using the maximum weight for each exercise that rivals what ADVANCED lifters use, you are a genetic freak steps above those like Sergio Oliva.[/quote]
Hardly, they only do like 3 to 4 sets per exercise tops, and it’s never max weight, never to failure. It’s like circuit training.
All right guys.
I think it’s time for CW to weigh in on this.
Let’s Clear Some Stuff Up
[quote]trextacy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
trextacy wrote:
Professor X wrote:
trextacy wrote:
as i’ve stated, splits may work particularly well when anabolics are used.
The fact that you believe anabolics are needed to make splits work is what discredits everything else you type.
that is not what I wrote. as indignant and self righteous as you are, you’d think you would read, think and type more carefully. i’m not trying to get into a pissing match, but the barage of bullshit is stifling any semblance of a decent discussion. i’m trying to discuss training methods and support the position that full body workouts 3x per week are good at building muscle mass and are particularly appropriate for newbs and intermediate lifters, while splits are best utilized by people who have “outgrown” other methods or are using assistance (since the damage to the muscle is so severe).
what pro bodybuilders do is take a fair amount of illegal drugs and hormones and train using split routines. if you can get mad arm growth training them once per week rather than 3, then that’s what people will do because it’s easier. that full body workouts are harder to do with intensity is a no brainer.
…
This is backwards. Pro BB’s use steroids to recover faster. They train harder with more volume using splits 5 days a week than other people do who train 3 days a week.
The fact that people buy into the BS that 3 is more than 5 boggles my mind.
Training a bodypart 3 times per week (each session) is more than training a bodyparty once per week. If this post reflects your understanding of the issues then you need to stop posting.
[/quote]
Training 3 hours a week is less than training 5 hours a week.
A few sets three times a week is not more than one solid hour dedicated to an exercise or a bodypart.
Do you think on leg day people do 3 sets and then go home?
Training three times a week is less than 5 times no matter how you spin it.
[quote]trextacy wrote:
Training a bodypart 3 times per week (each session) is more than training a bodyparty once per week. If this post reflects your understanding of the issues then you need to stop posting.
[/quote]
I hit chest/back/quads/hams all 3 times a week. Ditto for biceps and triceps. Calves 6 times a week and shoulders get hit 3-4 times a week. All with a good amount of volume and different exercises. There is no way in hell to squeeze this into 3 weekly workouts.
Splits dont work if you aint taking NO-Explode!!!
[quote]NateOrade wrote:
All right guys.
I think it’s time for CW to weigh in on this.
Let’s Clear Some Stuff Up[/quote]
LOL
[quote]greekdawg wrote:
Professor X wrote:
One thing I know for sure is that if you can do all of that shit in only one training session jumping from legs to shoulders to chest while also using the maximum weight for each exercise that rivals what ADVANCED lifters use, you are a genetic freak steps above those like Sergio Oliva.
Hardly, they only do like 3 to 4 sets per exercise tops, and it’s never max weight, never to failure. It’s like circuit training.[/quote]
You don’t get it. Read the article from 1971 that I linked above. Show you have an open mind and are willing to engage on the substance. Weekly set totals are comparable. You don’t go to failure for a reason. Failure isn’t the end all, and if you think it is then you must think that HIT is the holy grail. Of course, it’s more complicated than that but please continue to mischaracterize the issue and how a full body approach looks.
“Lets Clear Some Stuff Up” - lol
[quote]greekdawg wrote:
NateOrade wrote:
All right guys.
I think it’s time for CW to weigh in on this.
Let’s Clear Some Stuff Up
LOL[/quote]
that seems like it would be really funny if i got it lol
greekdawg how many sets are you hitting each muscle with each week with the split your using?