Depends.
In Bro Splits it can happen that most of work is bullshit. Like on machines and cables and all that “isolation” garbage. You can do a complete chest day with pre-exhaustion and cables, machines, and whatnot and never really push your triceps to the limit.
Second thing is that VOLUME just by volume sake does not do much. For example, most people could actually harm their gains by doing an arm day if its not really necessary.
I might not be right and its just my opinion, but i believe that if you can do more arms after heavy compounds, you are just not training hard enough.
Also, i find it illogical that people who train legs, chest and back, would need an arm day for upper body, but no one needs a quad and hammy day after leg day? How come? How come we do bench that is upper body squat, and rows that are upper body deadlift, but we will have an extra day for bis and tris, and not an extra day for bis and tris of our legs?
How come 1 leg day is enough for all lower body, but you need and arm day, and upper body day is not enough? Our arms are kind of simmilar to our legs, where chest and lats are the glutes and abductors of our lower body.
Definitely that played a part. I had horrendous insomnia for much of it and still kept pushing through.
Another factor was that the routine was better for bringing my then lagging chest and rear delts.
I do think that splits are the best for all the details that are looked at in BB. I don’t think they’re the best who have a packed schedule who want to just be muscular, strong and lean.
I think bodypart splits would be the worst choice for me now. The same goes for some exercises. I used to be pretty good at front and back squats, so it’s not like I don’t do them because I suck at them. They along with deadlifts make feel awful. And I don’t mean awful as in my heart pounding after doing them or soreness. I mean I feel like crap systemically for days afterward. I’m mentally sluggish and everything from my traps to calves feels stiff. So even though they’re great, I don’t do them.
Makes a ton of sense.
What’s kind of funny for me is I almost prefer them, even though I’m not a competitive bodybuilder, because I don’t have to think - I just go do stuff for that muscle until I’m tired. I absolutely believe you there’s more efficient ways, though.
I’m not sure why this isn’t a fair comparison. It sounds as if you’re confusing frequency with volume.
I think you’re looking at this as though there’s a cup full of gains that you get every day, and you can either pour that cup into one place or all over the place, but that’s just too much of an oversimplification to answer. Your body is signaled to repair the muscles that have undergone trauma from training. Could be one spot that recovers or many, but you can do biceps one day and triceps the next and still get the same growth as you would from doing both in one day, whereas your theory would suggest that you’ve gotten 100% of the “gains cup” for each muscle with the first scenario and only 50% for each muscle with the second. It doesn’t work like that, and it’s precisely for that reason that studies with varying frequency use volume as a constant.
Many people find they can do more volume at high intensity on a split (or do their workout faster).
I mean the study has to control for volume, intensity and frequency if it is seeing if the scheduling of exercises makes a difference but by doing that you eliminate one of the reasons you do the split in the first place…classic catch 22.
I guess what I mean is that upper lower will have 10 sets of chest, 4 6 sets of shoulders and 6 sets of biceps and triceps for example.
Where as the split would have 12 chest, 12 shoulders and 12 biceps and 12 triceps. I understand that the intensity and weights lifted are all different but that’s why I don’t think volume should be matched because If you were comparing a person doing one or another they both do different volume on some muscles.
I’ve spent the last few months experimenting between an upper lower vs a split and splits are definitely easier on the body. I finished an upper lower abs wanted to improve my arms a bit (after that great arm thread) so thought an old school split might help and it’s good fun.
I do find it a slog, warming up for a chest compound, then a back row, then a back pull, then shoulders, then some isolation work. Just knackering but that’s me at the moment and everyone is different.
I think you’re still missing the frequency factor. In this example, you’d be doing “10 sets of chest, 4 6 sets of shoulders and 6 sets of biceps and triceps” twice a week with an upper/lower approach vs “12 chest, 12 shoulders and 12 biceps and 12 triceps” once a week with a split. No?
Upper/lower and full-body splits really lend themselves to supersetting opposing muscle groups. Cuts down training time, makes warming up easier, adds some free conditioning work, and helps the pump (if you’re after that) and overall performance.
No that is weekly volume. There is no way to match a bro split in an upper and lower format. In most of the upper lower splits I’ve seen and run you’d do 2 push, 2 pull big lifts, an isolation chest or shoulders and then some isolation arm work.
That’s 10-12 sets total per week for chest and back but an upper lower always has less direct arm volume and usually chest isolation or shoulder work.
Maybe I’m pushing too hard on my chest and back first lifts, but after 8 sets of push and 8 sets of pull I’ve not really got much left in the tank, let alone enough to do 6 sets of biceps and triceps to match a bro weekly volume split.
why do you think you need those sets in the first place? you are talking like just mushing in extra volume will give you extra inches on your arms…
when i did a ton of streoids and was in a caloric surplus i did 531 with no arm work, and then i did extra arm work… i didnt gain a single centimeter more to my arms than i did when not doing arms… if you have enough, then doing MORE wont be beneficial…
Also, keep in mind that volume has diminished returns in terms of stimulus for growth. If sets are intense, then first set or maybe first two sets generate MOST of the stimulus for the day. The extra set increases that by maybe 10-15% and everything beyond that is just grinding your CNS and wasting hours for maybe extra 3-5%.
You have to understand that if you did enough pullups, chinups and rows then adding just loads of sets for biceps wont grow you more biceps… you might stimulate some extra 5% or annihilate instead of stimulate.
Its not like the total volume is proportionate to gains.
Dave Palumbo even said that he had his best physique when he did 6 sets per bodypart a week, and maybe he did like 8-10 for legs and back.
With my long arms I do need direct arm work. I ran 531 for years without any real arm increase but when I added more volume they improved but are still a weak point of mine.
Most of what I have read states weekly volume per body part as around 10-12 working sets. That’s all I’m aiming for, nothing special.
Gotcha. Then we’re imagining different hypothetical scenarios because six or seven different exercises is on the higher end of work in an upper-body session.
Sounds more like a work capacity issue. Arm work is some of the least stressful work you can do. You should definitely be able to bang out a couple sets of isolation work after big stuff. Maybe end with triceps work in one session and biceps work in the next? Like Flap was saying the other day, you don’t need much direct work after hitting presses/rows/pulls.
If you wanted to get a little more complex with programming, you could even play around with “a push-emphasis upper body day” and a “pull-emphasis upper body day”, but that’s getting into the weeds a bit.
If your specific programming goal is to include 10-12 sets for arms, I still see no reason why that couldn’t be handled with any split. It’s just a matter of programming within the big picture.
Yes, but probably not as much as you think. I have stupidly long monkey arms, which make deadlifts easier. You can see them on display here, specially with how long the barbell is when I lockout
I have built up my arms pretty decent
I do ONE set of curls a week. They’re Poundstone curls, so it’s 100+ reps, but it’s STILL one set. I do 1 set of band pushdowns every day. And that’s it. And that fits in REAL easy with any plan.
Volume is dandy, but effort and time are really key.
Secret of the lifting universe that no diet or drug will fix.
Still pretending it’s not true though.
You may be interested in the alternative of solipsism.
I googled “opposite of solipsism“, read a bit quickly on Reddit and confirmed my suspicions. I have no idea what any of your ideology things mean, and don’t think I’m mentally developed enough to understand them.
Im just an angry hillbilly with a basic public school education, do I fit into a cool group!?
Ah, I was saying the alternative to time BEING solipsism.
Basically, if you don’t want to play by the world’s rules, you make your own world, haha.
That sounds like exactly the kind of sentiment my mind would have attributed to your character…
Yea, this is simmilar to how i see arm work - after the important stuff i might just do an amrap or a dropset or whatever the fuck, but just quick pump and burn.
My arms still suck tho, but they were not growing any more when i did 5 sets of biceps and 5 sets of triceps twice a week each.
It’s no joke a key element to my training philosophy.
And the cornerstone of my marriage. My wife doesn’t think it’s cute when I explain they’re all figments of my imagination. But that’s exactly I thought she’d feel.
I don’t know how that works for training. You mean you can do it because you decided you can?