I built almost all of my mass (5’7’', /from 135 to/ 190 lbs - not big YET) on bodypart split routines. Then I give a try TBT. And for me it was a mistake. It actually WORKED (I gain SOME muscle), but not even close as fast as on splits.
So FOR ME splits are superior to TBT. But if you don’t give a try, you won’t be sure.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
… personal trainers trying to sell shit…[/quote]
The root of most of the evil in the fitness world.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Professor X wrote:
… personal trainers trying to sell shit…
The root of most of the evil in the fitness world.[/quote]
and what are most of them recommending? complicated splits that require a spreadsheet to follow.
nothing simpler than a heavy, medium and light days centered around 3-4 big compound movements and some isolation and abs thrown in as desired. just progress by going up on the big lifts. switch’em up too. eat a lot. sleep a lot. rinse. repeat. once you are too strong to do that effectively, split things up, but going beyond 3-ways is a waste of time.
i attempted to let this thread die by not posting for a few days, but of course those that pretend to “hate” these threads the most keep it going.
the faux revulsion that some of these split fanboys (see, that term can be used by anyone) express in reaction to the charge that splits are easier and lacking in focus on pure, old school compound movements is hysterical. try doing something like what I outlined above like a pussy. sure, you may get a serious “burn” from your 20-set shoulders/arms day, but it just isn’t the same.
For example- i’m quite certain i’ve read prof x say he doesn’t do any of the following regularly or at all:
Any type of olympic lift.
Any type of clean
Any type of deadlift
Back Squats
Front Squats
Military press (barbell)
Bent over rows
I’m not sure about chest pressing movements-- my guess is that it’s primarily machines (I recall this from other threads, particularly the upper chest/lower chest discussions).
Please correct me if I’m wrong (but do so specifically, thanks).
So, we really have what is PRIMARILY a machine-based, “get a pump”, high volume M&F split. Whoopty friggin doo.
But, he still has the balls to demands people’s “Stats”. Excuse me for not giving a shit about your 12-rep max on chest supported Nautilus rowing.
Here is an article about a bodybuilder and his training(from last week):
Here is a similar article by the Editors of this site from earlier this year on a very similar topic:
But, please continue telling everyone that training full body is a joke and useless for someone training longer than 6 months. I have made allowances in my stance by saying it varies person to person and splits have a clear advantage for advanced lifters, but there is no quarter given to anyone who suggests that full body is a legitimate even though the evidence is clear.
[quote]trextacy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Professor X wrote:
… personal trainers trying to sell shit…
The root of most of the evil in the fitness world.
and what are most of them recommending? complicated splits that require a spreadsheet to follow.
nothing simpler than a heavy, medium and light days centered around 3-4 big compound movements and some isolation and abs thrown in as desired. just progress by going up on the big lifts. switch’em up too. eat a lot. sleep a lot. rinse. repeat. once you are too strong to do that effectively, split things up, but going beyond 3-ways is a waste of time.
i attempted to let this thread die by not posting for a few days, but of course those that pretend to “hate” these threads the most keep it going.
the faux revulsion that some of these split fanboys (see, that term can be used by anyone) express in reaction to the charge that splits are easier and lacking in focus on pure, old school compound movements is hysterical. try doing something like what I outlined above like a pussy. sure, you may get a serious “burn” from your 20-set shoulders/arms day, but it just isn’t the same.
For example- i’m quite certain i’ve read prof x say he doesn’t do any of the following regularly or at all:
Any type of olympic lift.
Any type of clean
Any type of deadlift
Back Squats
Front Squats
Military press (barbell)
Bent over rows
I’m not sure about chest pressing movements-- my guess is that it’s primarily machines (I recall this from other threads, particularly the upper chest/lower chest discussions).
Please correct me if I’m wrong (but do so specifically, thanks).
So, we really have what is PRIMARILY a machine-based, “get a pump”, high volume M&F split. Whoopty friggin doo.
But, he still has the balls to demands people’s “Stats”. Excuse me for not giving a shit about your 12-rep max on chest supported Nautilus rowing.
Here is an article about a bodybuilder and his training(from last week):
Here is a similar article by the Editors of this site from earlier this year on a very similar topic:
But, please continue telling everyone that training full body is a joke and useless for someone training longer than 6 months. I have made allowances in my stance by saying it varies person to person and splits have a clear advantage for advanced lifters, but there is no quarter given to anyone who suggests that full body is a legitimate even though the evidence is clear.
[/quote]
you are quite the dipshit. ANd have no idea what you’re talking about.
seriously, GTFO.
[quote]trextacy wrote:
For example- i’m quite certain i’ve read prof x say he doesn’t do any of the following regularly or at all:
Any type of olympic lift.
Any type of clean
Any type of deadlift
Back Squats
Front Squats
Military press (barbell)
Bent over rows
I’m not sure about chest pressing movements-- my guess is that it’s primarily machines (I recall this from other threads, particularly the upper chest/lower chest discussions).
Please correct me if I’m wrong (but do so specifically, thanks).
So, we really have what is PRIMARILY a machine-based, “get a pump”, high volume M&F split. Whoopty friggin doo.
But, he still has the balls to demands people’s “Stats”. Excuse me for not giving a shit about your 12-rep max on chest supported Nautilus rowing.
[/quote]
What the fuck? You are truly an idiot.
Now I am not Professor X, and no doubt he will coem here soon enough, but do you really, honestly, TRULY believe that anything you say makes any more sense than a monkey with a golfclub?
You say how effective it is to train heavy compound lifts and progress in weight on them… which is precisely what ANYONE who weighs a lot and has significant muscle mass has been doing for years, machine or not.
The mere fact that you think someone who has built close to 100lb of muscle does ‘high volume get a pump’ training exclusively, shows that you are… clueless.
How much muscle have you built? How are you in the position to do anything but learn from people bigger and stronger than you are? Do you really think that a huge bodybuilder actually trains ‘wrong’… and yet has built massive amounts of muscle from these ‘wrong’ training methods?
Professor x has not even recommended all-machine based training to anyone needing a base in muscle mass. You fail to see this because you are an utter waste of life and a complete disgrace to bodybuilding and possible the human race.
[quote]Alquemist wrote:
trextacy wrote:
For example- i’m quite certain i’ve read prof x say he doesn’t do any of the following regularly or at all:
Any type of olympic lift.
Any type of clean
Any type of deadlift
Back Squats
Front Squats
Military press (barbell)
Bent over rows
I’m not sure about chest pressing movements-- my guess is that it’s primarily machines (I recall this from other threads, particularly the upper chest/lower chest discussions).
Please correct me if I’m wrong (but do so specifically, thanks).
So, we really have what is PRIMARILY a machine-based, “get a pump”, high volume M&F split. Whoopty friggin doo.
But, he still has the balls to demands people’s “Stats”. Excuse me for not giving a shit about your 12-rep max on chest supported Nautilus rowing.
What the fuck? You are truly an idiot.
Now I am not Professor X, and no doubt he will coem here soon enough, but do you really, honestly, TRULY believe that anything you say makes any more sense than a monkey with a golfclub?
You say how effective it is to train heavy compound lifts and progress in weight on them… which is precisely what ANYONE who weighs a lot and has significant muscle mass has been doing for years, machine or not.
The mere fact that you think someone who has built close to 100lb of muscle does ‘high volume get a pump’ training exclusively, shows that you are… clueless.
How much muscle have you built? How are you in the position to do anything but learn from people bigger and stronger than you are? Do you really think that a huge bodybuilder actually trains ‘wrong’… and yet has built massive amounts of muscle from these ‘wrong’ training methods?
Professor x has not even recommended all-machine based training to anyone needing a base in muscle mass. You fail to see this because you are an utter waste of life and a complete disgrace to bodybuilding and possible the human race.[/quote]
yeah, that.
[quote]trextacy wrote:
the faux revulsion that some of these split fanboys (see, that term can be used by anyone) express in reaction to the charge that splits are easier and lacking in focus on pure, old school compound movements is hysterical. try doing something like what I outlined above like a pussy. sure, you may get a serious “burn” from your 20-set shoulders/arms day, but it just isn’t the same.
[/quote]
What is truly hysterical, is this paragraph. It proves once and for all, that you no absolutely nothing on how to built even a semblance of muscle even reminiscent of ‘muscular’.
[quote]Alquemist wrote:
trextacy wrote:
For example- i’m quite certain i’ve read prof x say he doesn’t do any of the following regularly or at all:
Any type of olympic lift.
Any type of clean
Any type of deadlift
Back Squats
Front Squats
Military press (barbell)
Bent over rows
I’m not sure about chest pressing movements-- my guess is that it’s primarily machines (I recall this from other threads, particularly the upper chest/lower chest discussions).
Please correct me if I’m wrong (but do so specifically, thanks).
So, we really have what is PRIMARILY a machine-based, “get a pump”, high volume M&F split. Whoopty friggin doo.
But, he still has the balls to demands people’s “Stats”. Excuse me for not giving a shit about your 12-rep max on chest supported Nautilus rowing.
What the fuck? You are truly an idiot.
Now I am not Professor X, and no doubt he will coem here soon enough, but do you really, honestly, TRULY believe that anything you say makes any more sense than a monkey with a golfclub?
You say how effective it is to train heavy compound lifts and progress in weight on them… which is precisely what ANYONE who weighs a lot and has significant muscle mass has been doing for years, machine or not.
The mere fact that you think someone who has built close to 100lb of muscle does ‘high volume get a pump’ training exclusively, shows that you are… clueless.
How much muscle have you built? How are you in the position to do anything but learn from people bigger and stronger than you are? Do you really think that a huge bodybuilder actually trains ‘wrong’… and yet has built massive amounts of muscle from these ‘wrong’ training methods?
Professor x has not even recommended all-machine based training to anyone needing a base in muscle mass. You fail to see this because you are an utter waste of life and a complete disgrace to bodybuilding and possible the human race.[/quote]
didn’t say he recommends all machine-based. primarily. read.
you don’t dispute that he doesn’t do the compounds I listed. what others are there that you know he does do?
you can’t dispute shit. just name call and swing on his nuts.
sounds like x has average <10 lbs of gain per year…how much of that is lean? i believe he’s currently above 12%…so, what’s the big deal?
haha. i am a waste of life? if you only knew.
WHERE IS THE SUBSTANCE IN YOUR POST?? NOWHERE!
[quote]trextacy wrote:
For example- i’m quite certain i’ve read prof x say he doesn’t do any of the following regularly or at all:
Any type of olympic lift.
Any type of clean
Any type of deadlift
Back Squats
Front Squats
Military press (barbell)
Bent over rows
[/quote]
What?
You must be a troll. It is sad that you aren’t better at it.
What bodybuilder EVER avoided overhead presses?
You are one sad fool.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
trextacy wrote:
For example- i’m quite certain i’ve read prof x say he doesn’t do any of the following regularly or at all:
Any type of olympic lift.
Any type of clean
Any type of deadlift
Back Squats
Front Squats
Military press (barbell)
Bent over rows
What?
You must be a troll. It is sad that you aren’t better at it.
What bodybuilder EVER avoided overhead presses?
You are one sad fool.[/quote]
Sweet comeback. Which of those do you do regularly? Answer the question. I never mentioned “overhead” presses.
Better yet— which compound movements do you do? You could save us all a lot of time by just answering a question rather than calling me a troll (which, I’m not).
Im quite certain Ive heard Professor X say that he doesn’t actually lift at all, he just plays alot of really hardcore ping pong.
See I can make shit up too.
[quote]zephead4747 wrote:
trextacy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Professor X wrote:
… personal trainers trying to sell shit…
The root of most of the evil in the fitness world.
and what are most of them recommending? complicated splits that require a spreadsheet to follow.
nothing simpler than a heavy, medium and light days centered around 3-4 big compound movements and some isolation and abs thrown in as desired. just progress by going up on the big lifts. switch’em up too. eat a lot. sleep a lot. rinse. repeat. once you are too strong to do that effectively, split things up, but going beyond 3-ways is a waste of time.
i attempted to let this thread die by not posting for a few days, but of course those that pretend to “hate” these threads the most keep it going.
the faux revulsion that some of these split fanboys (see, that term can be used by anyone) express in reaction to the charge that splits are easier and lacking in focus on pure, old school compound movements is hysterical. try doing something like what I outlined above like a pussy. sure, you may get a serious “burn” from your 20-set shoulders/arms day, but it just isn’t the same.
For example- i’m quite certain i’ve read prof x say he doesn’t do any of the following regularly or at all:
Any type of olympic lift.
Any type of clean
Any type of deadlift
Back Squats
Front Squats
Military press (barbell)
Bent over rows
I’m not sure about chest pressing movements-- my guess is that it’s primarily machines (I recall this from other threads, particularly the upper chest/lower chest discussions).
Please correct me if I’m wrong (but do so specifically, thanks).
So, we really have what is PRIMARILY a machine-based, “get a pump”, high volume M&F split. Whoopty friggin doo.
But, he still has the balls to demands people’s “Stats”. Excuse me for not giving a shit about your 12-rep max on chest supported Nautilus rowing.
Here is an article about a bodybuilder and his training(from last week):
Here is a similar article by the Editors of this site from earlier this year on a very similar topic:
But, please continue telling everyone that training full body is a joke and useless for someone training longer than 6 months. I have made allowances in my stance by saying it varies person to person and splits have a clear advantage for advanced lifters, but there is no quarter given to anyone who suggests that full body is a legitimate even though the evidence is clear.
you are quite the dipshit. ANd have no idea what you’re talking about.
seriously, GTFO.[/quote]
You are just the freshman trying to get in good with the seniors. Please try to address the issues or don’t post at all.
And the whole “GTFO” thing is getting old. This is a thread about splits vs. full body training. That is what it’s about. That’s what’s being discussed. If you don’t like that topic or reading what people on the other side of the debate are saying, then don’t click on the thread.
He’s done that before… read this whole thing and then you will get a decent understanding of how his training is set up.
[quote]trextacy wrote:
Alquemist wrote:
trextacy wrote:
For example- i’m quite certain i’ve read prof x say he doesn’t do any of the following regularly or at all:
Any type of olympic lift.
Any type of clean
Any type of deadlift
Back Squats
Front Squats
Military press (barbell)
Bent over rows
I’m not sure about chest pressing movements-- my guess is that it’s primarily machines (I recall this from other threads, particularly the upper chest/lower chest discussions).
Please correct me if I’m wrong (but do so specifically, thanks).
So, we really have what is PRIMARILY a machine-based, “get a pump”, high volume M&F split. Whoopty friggin doo.
But, he still has the balls to demands people’s “Stats”. Excuse me for not giving a shit about your 12-rep max on chest supported Nautilus rowing.
What the fuck? You are truly an idiot.
Now I am not Professor X, and no doubt he will coem here soon enough, but do you really, honestly, TRULY believe that anything you say makes any more sense than a monkey with a golfclub?
You say how effective it is to train heavy compound lifts and progress in weight on them… which is precisely what ANYONE who weighs a lot and has significant muscle mass has been doing for years, machine or not.
The mere fact that you think someone who has built close to 100lb of muscle does ‘high volume get a pump’ training exclusively, shows that you are… clueless.
How much muscle have you built? How are you in the position to do anything but learn from people bigger and stronger than you are? Do you really think that a huge bodybuilder actually trains ‘wrong’… and yet has built massive amounts of muscle from these ‘wrong’ training methods?
Professor x has not even recommended all-machine based training to anyone needing a base in muscle mass. You fail to see this because you are an utter waste of life and a complete disgrace to bodybuilding and possible the human race.
didn’t say he recommends all machine-based. primarily. read.
you don’t dispute that he doesn’t do the compounds I listed. what others are there that you know he does do?
you can’t dispute shit. just name call and swing on his nuts.
sounds like x has average <10 lbs of gain per year…how much of that is lean? i believe he’s currently above 12%…so, what’s the big deal?
haha. i am a waste of life? if you only knew.
WHERE IS THE SUBSTANCE IN YOUR POST?? NOWHERE!
[/quote]
Ha ha, is that your attempt at a comeback? You need to learn how to troll properly. This is quickly becoming boring.
[quote]trextacy wrote:
Professor X wrote:
trextacy wrote:
For example- i’m quite certain i’ve read prof x say he doesn’t do any of the following regularly or at all:
Any type of olympic lift.
Any type of clean
Any type of deadlift
Back Squats
Front Squats
Military press (barbell)
Bent over rows
What?
You must be a troll. It is sad that you aren’t better at it.
What bodybuilder EVER avoided overhead presses?
You are one sad fool.
Sweet comeback. Which of those do you do regularly? Answer the question. I never mentioned “overhead” presses.
Better yet— which compound movements do you do? You could save us all a lot of time by just answering a question rather than calling me a troll (which, I’m not).[/quote]
Scott M already posted the link where I went into detail about how I train. You aren’t respected enough for me to retype all of that info especially since it has been answered many times over on this site for the past 8 years.
Further, who do you know of who gained even as little as 50lbs of muscle after the age of 18 but did no compound movements?
[quote]trextacy wrote:
zephead4747 wrote:
trextacy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Professor X wrote:
… personal trainers trying to sell shit…
The root of most of the evil in the fitness world.
and what are most of them recommending? complicated splits that require a spreadsheet to follow.
nothing simpler than a heavy, medium and light days centered around 3-4 big compound movements and some isolation and abs thrown in as desired. just progress by going up on the big lifts. switch’em up too. eat a lot. sleep a lot. rinse. repeat. once you are too strong to do that effectively, split things up, but going beyond 3-ways is a waste of time.
i attempted to let this thread die by not posting for a few days, but of course those that pretend to “hate” these threads the most keep it going.
the faux revulsion that some of these split fanboys (see, that term can be used by anyone) express in reaction to the charge that splits are easier and lacking in focus on pure, old school compound movements is hysterical. try doing something like what I outlined above like a pussy. sure, you may get a serious “burn” from your 20-set shoulders/arms day, but it just isn’t the same.
For example- i’m quite certain i’ve read prof x say he doesn’t do any of the following regularly or at all:
Any type of olympic lift.
Any type of clean
Any type of deadlift
Back Squats
Front Squats
Military press (barbell)
Bent over rows
I’m not sure about chest pressing movements-- my guess is that it’s primarily machines (I recall this from other threads, particularly the upper chest/lower chest discussions).
Please correct me if I’m wrong (but do so specifically, thanks).
So, we really have what is PRIMARILY a machine-based, “get a pump”, high volume M&F split. Whoopty friggin doo.
But, he still has the balls to demands people’s “Stats”. Excuse me for not giving a shit about your 12-rep max on chest supported Nautilus rowing.
Here is an article about a bodybuilder and his training(from last week):
Here is a similar article by the Editors of this site from earlier this year on a very similar topic:
But, please continue telling everyone that training full body is a joke and useless for someone training longer than 6 months. I have made allowances in my stance by saying it varies person to person and splits have a clear advantage for advanced lifters, but there is no quarter given to anyone who suggests that full body is a legitimate even though the evidence is clear.
you are quite the dipshit. ANd have no idea what you’re talking about.
seriously, GTFO.
You are just the freshman trying to get in good with the seniors. Please try to address the issues or don’t post at all.
And the whole “GTFO” thing is getting old. This is a thread about splits vs. full body training. That is what it’s about. That’s what’s being discussed. If you don’t like that topic or reading what people on the other side of the debate are saying, then don’t click on the thread.[/quote]
You’re dilusional. I’ve argued about something with just about everyone on this forum with 1k+ posts. I’m not trying to ‘get good’ with anyone. You’re just the dipshit who meanders the hallway thinking about girls (muscle mass), that he’ll never have.
I can make cute highschool references too.
Seriously you are a moron.
[quote]zephead4747 wrote:
trextacy wrote:
zephead4747 wrote:
trextacy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Professor X wrote:
… personal trainers trying to sell shit…
The root of most of the evil in the fitness world.
and what are most of them recommending? complicated splits that require a spreadsheet to follow.
nothing simpler than a heavy, medium and light days centered around 3-4 big compound movements and some isolation and abs thrown in as desired. just progress by going up on the big lifts. switch’em up too. eat a lot.
sleep a lot. rinse. repeat. once you are too strong to do that effectively, split things up, but going beyond 3-ways is a waste of time.
i attempted to let this thread die by not posting for a few days, but of course those that pretend to “hate” these threads the most keep it going.
the faux revulsion that some of these split fanboys (see, that term can be used by anyone) express in reaction to the charge that splits are easier and lacking in focus on pure, old school compound movements is hysterical.
try doing something like what I outlined above like a pussy. sure, you may get a serious “burn” from your 20-set shoulders/arms day, but it just isn’t the same.
For example- i’m quite certain i’ve read prof x say he doesn’t do any of the following regularly or at all:
Any type of olympic lift.
Any type of clean
Any type of deadlift
Back Squats
Front Squats
Military press (barbell)
Bent over rows
I’m not sure about chest pressing movements-- my guess is that it’s primarily machines (I recall this from other threads, particularly the upper chest/lower chest discussions).
Please correct me if I’m wrong (but do so specifically, thanks).
So, we really have what is PRIMARILY a machine-based, “get a pump”, high volume M&F split. Whoopty friggin doo.
But, he still has the balls to demands people’s “Stats”. Excuse me for not giving a shit about your 12-rep max on chest supported Nautilus rowing.
Here is an article about a bodybuilder and his training(from last week):
Here is a similar article by the Editors of this site from earlier this year on a very similar topic:
But, please continue telling everyone that training full body is a joke and useless for someone training longer than 6 months.
I have made allowances in my stance by saying it varies person to person and splits have a clear advantage for advanced lifters, but there is no quarter given to anyone who suggests that full body is a legitimate even though the evidence is clear.
you are quite the dipshit. ANd have no idea what you’re talking about.
seriously, GTFO.
You are just the freshman trying to get in good with the seniors. Please try to address the issues or don’t post at all.
And the whole “GTFO” thing is getting old. This is a thread about splits vs. full body training. That is what it’s about. That’s what’s being discussed. If you don’t like that topic or reading what people on the other side of the debate are saying, then don’t click on the thread.
You’re dilusional. I’ve argued about something with just about everyone on this forum with 1k+ posts. I’m not trying to ‘get good’ with anyone. You’re just the dipshit who meanders the hallway thinking about girls (muscle mass), that he’ll never have.
I can make cute highschool references too.
Seriously you are a moron.[/quote]
There is ZERO substance in this post. How do you not see this? You have not said anything on point or on topic. It’s not enough to just say I’m delusional- you have to explain why. That’s how his works.
And yes, you are a kiss ass…who sucks at metaphors; Hint: if you have to explain it in parentheses, probably not a good metaphor.
I am aware of the Professor X gloryhole thread. I trained in a similar fashion based on X’s recommendations for a while, and made some decent gains from it. Despite the caricature of my posts, I respect X.
I just think that the DISRESPECT shown to other folks and training methods brings the forum down.
I don’t advocate going this route exclusively though. And, it works better for X than it would for me because X is bigger and stronger. So, while I grew, it wasn’t optimal, but it may become optimal in a few years. That said, I think more compounds and less machines would be better and there is no need for a “biceps” day.
Here is what I found on the first page where X talks about his training (from 2005, mind you):
Chest
HS incline (4 sets working from two plates a side to five plates, the last set ending in 10 reps lately)
HS flatbench (3 sets working from 3 plates a side to 5…I did that for 8 reps last week)
Pec deck machine (however many sets gets enough blood into the area)
-Biceps
Warm up either going really light on the HS curl machine or real light with dumbbells (like 25lbs)
HS curl machine (3-4 sets going up to 4 plates)
Preacher curls (starting with a 45lbs dumbbell and moving up to around 85lbs lately even though I have done more in the past…I am trying to concentrate more on form lately)
Cybex curl machine (last exercise, usually just to get more blood pumped and not for going extremely heavy)
-Shoulders
Cybex plate loaded military press (warm up is real light, working sets go for about 4 sets)
Lateral raises (3-4 sets)
Shrugs (I may start cutting these out because my traps grow fast compared to the work I do for them)
One arm laterals (two exercises for the same muscle group because my focus is on really bringing them out because I don’t believe I have ever seen someone with lateral delts that were too big)
Reverse pec deck flyes for rear delts.
-Back
T-Bar rows (3-4 sets)
Lat pulldowns (3-4 sets)
Upright HS row
Cybex plate loaded Lat machine (again, two exercises for the same muscle group because I am really trying to bring them out as well.
I may do a couple more sets on the lat pulldown last but not going heavy
-Legs
Calf raises (seated and standing, 3sets of each…my calves still fall short but I?m trying)
I believe it is considered a hack press, but it allows you to get into squat position with no back support on a plate loaded machine with pads for my shoulders. I have been doing these lately instead of regular squats simply because I feel it more and can apparently go heavier on it.
Leg press (go up 22 plates over 4-5 sets)
Leg curls (3-4 sets)
Leg extensions (3-4 sets)
That is pretty much it. If you need me to go into further detail, just ask but that is how I train lately.
Also, you can see where X states that he much prefers leg press to squat in another thread from toda/yesterday (since he only does legs about once a week, reasonable to conclude not a lot of squatting going on).
And T-bar row is hardly a “compound”…more of a hybrid.
Please tell me how “delusional” it is to conclude from the above that compounds are not exactly the cornerstone of X’s training? Seriously guys…
[quote]trextacy wrote:
I am aware of the Professor X gloryhole thread. I trained in a similar fashion based on X’s recommendations for a while, and made some decent gains from it. Despite the caricature of my posts, I respect X.
I just think that the DISRESPECT shown to other folks and training methods brings the forum down.
I don’t advocate going this route exclusively though. And, it works better for X than it would for me because X is bigger and stronger. So, while I grew, it wasn’t optimal, but it may become optimal in a few years. That said, I think more compounds and less machines would be better and there is no need for a “biceps” day.
Here is what I found on the first page where X talks about his training (from 2005, mind you):
Chest
HS incline (4 sets working from two plates a side to five plates, the last set ending in 10 reps lately)
HS flatbench (3 sets working from 3 plates a side to 5…I did that for 8 reps last week)
Pec deck machine (however many sets gets enough blood into the area)
-Biceps
Warm up either going really light on the HS curl machine or real light with dumbbells (like 25lbs)
HS curl machine (3-4 sets going up to 4 plates)
Preacher curls (starting with a 45lbs dumbbell and moving up to around 85lbs lately even though I have done more in the past…I am trying to concentrate more on form lately)
Cybex curl machine (last exercise, usually just to get more blood pumped and not for going extremely heavy)
-Shoulders
Cybex plate loaded military press (warm up is real light, working sets go for about 4 sets)
Lateral raises (3-4 sets)
Shrugs (I may start cutting these out because my traps grow fast compared to the work I do for them)
One arm laterals (two exercises for the same muscle group because my focus is on really bringing them out because I don’t believe I have ever seen someone with lateral delts that were too big)
Reverse pec deck flyes for rear delts.
-Back
T-Bar rows (3-4 sets)
Lat pulldowns (3-4 sets)
Upright HS row
Cybex plate loaded Lat machine (again, two exercises for the same muscle group because I am really trying to bring them out as well.
I may do a couple more sets on the lat pulldown last but not going heavy
-Legs
Calf raises (seated and standing, 3sets of each…my calves still fall short but I?m trying)
I believe it is considered a hack press, but it allows you to get into squat position with no back support on a plate loaded machine with pads for my shoulders. I have been doing these lately instead of regular squats simply because I feel it more and can apparently go heavier on it.
Leg press (go up 22 plates over 4-5 sets)
Leg curls (3-4 sets)
Leg extensions (3-4 sets)
That is pretty much it. If you need me to go into further detail, just ask but that is how I train lately.
Also, you can see where X states that he much prefers leg press to squat in another thread from toda/yesterday (since he only does legs about once a week, reasonable to conclude not a lot of squatting going on).
And T-bar row is hardly a “compound”…more of a hybrid.
Please tell me how “delusional” it is to conclude from the above that compounds are not exactly the cornerstone of X’s training? Seriously guys…[/quote]
My training is not static. There is no way you can pull up a thread from 3 years ago and expect me to train EXACTLY the same today.
I have stated I squat 4 fucking times in THIS thread yet you keep telling me I don’t.
No one needs little snot nosed brats like you in this forum.
[quote]trextacy wrote:
zephead4747 wrote:
trextacy wrote:
zephead4747 wrote:
trextacy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Professor X wrote:
… personal trainers trying to sell shit…
The root of most of the evil in the fitness world.
and what are most of them recommending? complicated splits that require a spreadsheet to follow.
nothing simpler than a heavy, medium and light days centered around 3-4 big compound movements and some isolation and abs thrown in as desired. just progress by going up on the big lifts. switch’em up too. eat a lot.
sleep a lot. rinse. repeat. once you are too strong to do that effectively, split things up, but going beyond 3-ways is a waste of time.
i attempted to let this thread die by not posting for a few days, but of course those that pretend to “hate” these threads the most keep it going.
the faux revulsion that some of these split fanboys (see, that term can be used by anyone) express in reaction to the charge that splits are easier and lacking in focus on pure, old school compound movements is hysterical.
try doing something like what I outlined above like a pussy. sure, you may get a serious “burn” from your 20-set shoulders/arms day, but it just isn’t the same.
For example- i’m quite certain i’ve read prof x say he doesn’t do any of the following regularly or at all:
Any type of olympic lift.
Any type of clean
Any type of deadlift
Back Squats
Front Squats
Military press (barbell)
Bent over rows
I’m not sure about chest pressing movements-- my guess is that it’s primarily machines (I recall this from other threads, particularly the upper chest/lower chest discussions).
Please correct me if I’m wrong (but do so specifically, thanks).
So, we really have what is PRIMARILY a machine-based, “get a pump”, high volume M&F split. Whoopty friggin doo.
But, he still has the balls to demands people’s “Stats”. Excuse me for not giving a shit about your 12-rep max on chest supported Nautilus rowing.
Here is an article about a bodybuilder and his training(from last week):
Here is a similar article by the Editors of this site from earlier this year on a very similar topic:
But, please continue telling everyone that training full body is a joke and useless for someone training longer than 6 months.
I have made allowances in my stance by saying it varies person to person and splits have a clear advantage for advanced lifters, but there is no quarter given to anyone who suggests that full body is a legitimate even though the evidence is clear.
you are quite the dipshit. ANd have no idea what you’re talking about.
seriously, GTFO.
You are just the freshman trying to get in good with the seniors. Please try to address the issues or don’t post at all.
And the whole “GTFO” thing is getting old. This is a thread about splits vs. full body training. That is what it’s about. That’s what’s being discussed. If you don’t like that topic or reading what people on the other side of the debate are saying, then don’t click on the thread.
You’re dilusional. I’ve argued about something with just about everyone on this forum with 1k+ posts. I’m not trying to ‘get good’ with anyone. You’re just the dipshit who meanders the hallway thinking about girls (muscle mass), that he’ll never have.
I can make cute highschool references too.
Seriously you are a moron.
There is ZERO substance in this post. How do you not see this? You have not said anything on point or on topic. It’s not enough to just say I’m delusional- you have to explain why. That’s how his works.
And yes, you are a kiss ass…who sucks at metaphors; Hint: if you have to explain it in parentheses, probably not a good metaphor.[/quote]
yet again.
you are quite the dipshit.