Bodybuilders Train Wrong

Training Competitive Bodybuilding
41

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
trextacy wrote:
Wow. Many of you cried, bitched and moaned about the other thread and wanted the topic to “die” and for anyone that thinks full body workouts have a place in bodybuilding to “gtfo”. Now you start a sarcastic thread so you can circle jerk and continue to have the argument with no one in particular.

Please tell me you guys see the irony of all of this.

By the way, the issue isn’t whether pro bbers do splits. The issue is that if you truly want to emulate and assess how pro bbers get their size, to ignore the fact that they are drugged out the ass is to ignore a HUGE component. So, if you want to emulate the way bbers train, do drugs and follow their split. You guys can thump your chest and talk about massive eating and intensity, but you are kidding yourselves if you think you are going to look anything like a pro bber without drugs.

You really don’t get it, do you?
Who said anyone here is going to look like, say, Ronnie without drugs?
Drugs aren’t even what makes the difference, it’s genetics first and foremost.
You can still get freakishly huge drug-free and training on a split.
Some of us have proved that already…
And on more serious bb forums, you get many more like us.

You are small. You have no clue what you are talking about (this already manifests itself in the fact that you believe drugs to be a “huge” part of the equation, guess what, they only come after genetics, maximized diet and maximized training.)

And for the record, there are plenty of pro bb’ers who are smaller than us, the main difference is that they have better genetics for their muscle-shape and are obviously using certain substances to get shredded/dry to the extreme for their shows. Who cares about that? Do you think we want to walk around at 2% bodyfat and dehydrated all year 'round?
Nobody does that, and neither do we want to.

You seem somewhat lost, to be honest. You keep arguing and telling us that we have this and that goal and want to look like this and that, yet none of it is true.

And those of us who actually use and/or want to compete, well, who says that they can’t “look like the pros” ? The pros were once far from what they are now, after all.

I for one want to get as big as naturally possible, then go on maintenance and up my cardio and enjoy life at 240-250 with visible abs.

Not much longer and I can actually do that. In order to reach that level, you’ll have to be 280-300 in bulked state, unless you are extremely genetically gifted (even 99 percent of the pros are not that gifted and thus have to bulk too).
So I’ll continue to look somewhat smooth until I reach my goal, so what?

Maybe I’ll even go to 260 lean, not likely, but I’ll find out, right?

If I find that my hormones start sucking too much then I’ll go on HRT in my late 40’s or 50’s maybe, but that’s it.

You are like the people on you-tube whose comments can be found under every vid of everything bodybuilding-related: “oh it’s all them steroidz”
and “but his form is bad! He’s weak!”

What do you even want on a bodybuilding forum ?

[/quote]

Drugs are a huge part. I respect your efforts and don’t doubt you will achieve your goals. You are missing the irony of the OP in light of our other thread.

42

[quote]trextacy wrote:
Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
trextacy wrote:
Wow. Many of you cried, bitched and moaned about the other thread and wanted the topic to “die” and for anyone that thinks full body workouts have a place in bodybuilding to “gtfo”. Now you start a sarcastic thread so you can circle jerk and continue to have the argument with no one in particular.

Please tell me you guys see the irony of all of this.

By the way, the issue isn’t whether pro bbers do splits. The issue is that if you truly want to emulate and assess how pro bbers get their size, to ignore the fact that they are drugged out the ass is to ignore a HUGE component. So, if you want to emulate the way bbers train, do drugs and follow their split. You guys can thump your chest and talk about massive eating and intensity, but you are kidding yourselves if you think you are going to look anything like a pro bber without drugs.

You really don’t get it, do you?
Who said anyone here is going to look like, say, Ronnie without drugs?
Drugs aren’t even what makes the difference, it’s genetics first and foremost.
You can still get freakishly huge drug-free and training on a split.
Some of us have proved that already…
And on more serious bb forums, you get many more like us.

You are small. You have no clue what you are talking about (this already manifests itself in the fact that you believe drugs to be a “huge” part of the equation, guess what, they only come after genetics, maximized diet and maximized training.)

And for the record, there are plenty of pro bb’ers who are smaller than us, the main difference is that they have better genetics for their muscle-shape and are obviously using certain substances to get shredded/dry to the extreme for their shows. Who cares about that? Do you think we want to walk around at 2% bodyfat and dehydrated all year 'round?
Nobody does that, and neither do we want to.

You seem somewhat lost, to be honest. You keep arguing and telling us that we have this and that goal and want to look like this and that, yet none of it is true.

And those of us who actually use and/or want to compete, well, who says that they can’t “look like the pros” ? The pros were once far from what they are now, after all.

I for one want to get as big as naturally possible, then go on maintenance and up my cardio and enjoy life at 240-250 with visible abs.

Not much longer and I can actually do that. In order to reach that level, you’ll have to be 280-300 in bulked state, unless you are extremely genetically gifted (even 99 percent of the pros are not that gifted and thus have to bulk too).
So I’ll continue to look somewhat smooth until I reach my goal, so what?

Maybe I’ll even go to 260 lean, not likely, but I’ll find out, right?

If I find that my hormones start sucking too much then I’ll go on HRT in my late 40’s or 50’s maybe, but that’s it.

You are like the people on you-tube whose comments can be found under every vid of everything bodybuilding-related: “oh it’s all them steroidz”
and “but his form is bad! He’s weak!”

What do you even want on a bodybuilding forum ?

Drugs are a huge part. I respect your efforts and don’t doubt you will achieve your goals. You are missing the irony of the OP in light of our other thread.[/quote]

Man I’m getting tired of all this e-arguing.
Let’s just leave it at this, or I’ll have to switch back to a 6-way in order to keep myself from wasting my time on the computer :wink:

43

trextacy fuck off!

44

is this what u do in your spare time

45

don’t tbt people realize that when you do split training you train a bodypart a 2nd time during the week to a lesser degree.

ex. say you train back and use you perform the deadlift guess what you also train legs to a lesser extent and when you train shoulders and work on some rear delts exercises GUESS WHAT you just trained your back to leeser degree so on so forth.

think about people

routine ex.

sun legs if you do squats your whole body is taxed
mon. off
tues. chest which also hits your shoulders and tri’s
wed. back which hits your bi’s and forearms and legs when do the deadlift and barbell rows or any other non chest supported rows
thurs off
fri bis and tris and some rear delt training you will hit your chest and shoulders again by performing a close grip bench for your tri’s and you will be working your back again by working out your rear delts

46

That’s why I have a hard time coming up with a bodypart split routine that uses a lot of good compound exercises, because a lot of muscle groups overlap.

47

Why do people waste time on threads started by trolls? It wasn’t even decent sarcasm. Just trolling.

We need a way to kill these threads. In real life, people would walk away from idiots spouting nonsense at a party. Why can’t we learn to do this online?

48

[quote]skohcl wrote:
That’s why I have a hard time coming up with a bodypart split routine that uses a lot of good compound exercises, because a lot of muscle groups overlap.[/quote]

Then maybe you are putting more focus on “good compound exercises” than you are the actual progress you are making. There is nothing wrong with muscle groups overlapping. There is something wrong with how you organized what you are doing if you can’t find a way to make that work.

It is like some of you can’t decide whether you want to gain muscle or enter an Olympic weight lifting meet.

Lifting weights is the means to an end, not the goal itself in bodybuilding. If you are simply doing a bunch of crap because someone told you to, you are missing the point.

There are seven days in a week. There is something wrong with your schedule if you can’t do “good compound exercises” along with everything else.

49

[quote]Rat Poison wrote:
don’t tbt people realize that when you do split training you train a bodypart a 2nd time during the week to a lesser degree.

ex. say you train back and use you perform the deadlift guess what you also train legs to a lesser extent and when you train shoulders and work on some rear delts exercises GUESS WHAT you just trained your back to leeser degree so on so forth.

think about people

routine ex.

sun legs if you do squats your whole body is taxed
mon. off
tues. chest which also hits your shoulders and tri’s
wed. back which hits your bi’s and forearms and legs when do the deadlift and barbell rows or any other non chest supported rows
thurs off
fri bis and tris and some rear delt training you will hit your chest and shoulders again by performing a close grip bench for your tri’s and you will be working your back again by working out your rear delts[/quote]

strong fail on your linking abilities. and your jokes weren’t funny.

no one is saying splits suck. all i have said is that doing full body sessions is appropriate and even optimal for most people who are beginners and intermediates. splitting the body up beyond upper/lower for even intermediate lifters is probably not necessary. if you can accomplish in 3 days per week 5 days worth of split work, then why not do it? I believe in frequency and systemic hypertrophy though so if you don’t find those factors to be decisive then you would probably disagree.

Splits work.

On the charge that no bodybuilders use full body- i have provided MANY non-Waterbury examples.

50

[quote]trextacy wrote:
Rat Poison wrote:
don’t tbt people realize that when you do split training you train a bodypart a 2nd time during the week to a lesser degree.

ex. say you train back and use you perform the deadlift guess what you also train legs to a lesser extent and when you train shoulders and work on some rear delts exercises GUESS WHAT you just trained your back to leeser degree so on so forth.

think about people

routine ex.

sun legs if you do squats your whole body is taxed
mon. off
tues. chest which also hits your shoulders and tri’s
wed. back which hits your bi’s and forearms and legs when do the deadlift and barbell rows or any other non chest supported rows
thurs off
fri bis and tris and some rear delt training you will hit your chest and shoulders again by performing a close grip bench for your tri’s and you will be working your back again by working out your rear delts

strong fail on your linking abilities. and your jokes weren’t funny.

no one is saying splits suck. all i have said is that doing full body sessions is appropriate and even optimal for most people who are beginners and intermediates. splitting the body up beyond upper/lower for even intermediate lifters is probably not necessary. if you can accomplish in 3 days per week 5 days worth of split work, then why not do it? I believe in frequency and systemic hypertrophy though so if you don’t find those factors to be decisive then you would probably disagree.

Splits work.

On the charge that no bodybuilders use full body- i have provided MANY non-Waterbury examples.[/quote]

Can’t we lay this topic to rest…
You get big the way you want to, we get big the way we want to.
Simple, really.

51

[quote]trextacy wrote:
On the charge that no bodybuilders use full body- i have provided MANY non-Waterbury examples.[/quote]

I don’t think we’re debating what bodybuilders USE. It’s what they USED to get to where they currently are. And please, show me all these bodybuilders who got big (not maintained their size) on full body training, I would actually find that cool.

52

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
Can’t we lay this topic to rest…
You get big the way you want to, we get bigger than you.
Simple, really.[/quote]

Fixed.

53

[quote]Alquemist wrote:
Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
Can’t we lay this topic to rest…
You get big the way you want to, we get bigger than you.
Simple, really.

Fixed.[/quote]

Someone’s putting words in my mouth here :wink:
You evil person you.

54

[quote]hungry4more wrote:
trextacy wrote:
On the charge that no bodybuilders use full body- i have provided MANY non-Waterbury examples.

I don’t think we’re debating what bodybuilders USE. It’s what they USED to get to where they currently are. And please, show me all these bodybuilders who got big (not maintained their size) on full body training, I would actually find that cool. [/quote]

There actually isn’t a debate on this thread. It was started so people who deride proponents of full body methods can continue to complain (ironic considering they wanted the debate to go away).

There a 2 fundamental issues. First, there is the assertion that splits are vastly superior to full body approaches because pros use splits. Someone like me would say that logic is flawed when applied to a natural trainer because it doesn’t take into account the drug use component.

I would say that you can’t isolate the training variable because there are other variables (i.e. drug use) that skew the results. The fact that it’s there job (so, unlimited time and focus on bb-ing is a factor) is another factor, but not as important as the drugs.

People who act like aas and hormones are only a modest factor are kidding themselves. It isn’t just like supplements, and the shit works amazingly…if that wasn’t the case they wouldn’t do it. Period. So, that argument is a non-starter.

There may be other reasons splits are superior, but “because pros do/did it” is not a good one. This is pure intuition/opinion, but I think if you take drugs out of the equation, old school bbers who did full body (Reg Park, Steve Reeves, Grimek, etc.) would compare much more favorably with modern pros.

The other issue (the one that I find more interesting and worthy of discussion) is whether anyone with any “credibility” advocates full body training for packing on mass. I will exclude Waterbury from the discussion because, right or wrong, he has no credibility with most of the T-Cell guys.

I would say that bbers and respected trainers fall into this category, so what they do or recommend is relevant.

My only point is that full body can add large amounts of muscle and that splitting things out can be good for advanced bbers who need to focus on specific bodyparts or move so much weight that it makes sense. Or if they want to add a high volume cycle.

I also think that full body has benefits over splits for most people because it can eliminate training ADD and analysis paralysis and requires that the focus be on compounds (not to the exclusion of isolation movements though).

Here are some examples of bbers and trainers who advocate this approach (note that I don’t mention madcow, texas method, rippetoe or starr because the powers that be have already said they don’t “count”-lol).

Steve Reeves- he did full body and a 3-way split, but full body was his go-to for adding mass.

Reg Park- here are 2 T-Nation articles from the last few months that highlight his methods and the results:

Mike Mahler:The Reg Park Way To Serious Size And Strength

T-Nation editors:

HST- Hypertrophy Specific Training:
www.hypertrophy-specific.com/about.html

Thibadeau:
http://www.T-Nation.com/free_online_article/sports_body_training_performance_bodybuilding/mondays_with_thibs_the_reality_show_mass_circuit

Joel Marion: Stripped down hypertrophy:

Sensible Training by Dr. Leisnter:

www.cyberpump.com/preview/sense.html

These are just a few. Again, remember that the focus is adding as much muscle mass as possible while training naturally.

I think for many guys, training the basic compounds movements on a 3 day per week schedule (ABA, then BAB) works very well if consuming a caloric surplus and progression is there. for example:

A:
Squats
Bench
Rows
(some arm isolation)

B:
Deadlift
Military/overhead press
chins
(some calves/abs isolation)

have a heavy day (4x6, 5x5) and lighter day (3x10, 2x15) for each. Add weight or reps every time. Every 8 weeks, sub in cg bench, sl deads or whatever. Train with a focus and intensity that would frighten people.

I think that if someone eats big and clean, gets rest and progresses on the above for 3 years, you will see someone who is ahead of 99% of people. No log books or spreadsheets, no worrying about the optimum # of sets, reps, no worrying about exercise selection, no training ADD, no stressing about their split.

They will be big and strong as fuck. Then, if they want to add in more volume PER SESSION (remember, splits only have a volume advantage on a per session basis, with total weekly volume being roughly equivalent often times) then they can do that for a cycle and reap the benefits.

I would assert that they will be glad they waited and “reserved” that tool for use after they have pushed ahead with what I set out above and will get far more results from it then if they had started out that way.

Let me reiterate that I respect guys like X and ceph_carn who feel otherwise but hope that you can see where I’m coming from. This is a forum for discussing bodybuilding.

55

Trextacy, go suck a bag of dicks. Your arguments are idiotic. Stop fucking mentioning pro BBs/drugs, and look at the VAST MAJORITY of natural bodybuilders and other lifters who have built big muscles using splits, not TBT.

56

[quote]brancron wrote:
Trextacy, go suck a bag of dicks. Your arguments are idiotic. Stop fucking mentioning pro BBs/drugs, and look at the VAST MAJORITY of natural bodybuilders and other lifters who have built big muscles using splits, not TBT.[/quote]

Please explain how they are idiotic. I mentioned drugs because they are relevant to the topic. We are discussing training methods on a bodybuilding forum. If you don’t have anything to add then simply don’t participate.

57

[quote]trextacy wrote:
brancron wrote:
Trextacy, go suck a bag of dicks. Your arguments are idiotic. Stop fucking mentioning pro BBs/drugs, and look at the VAST MAJORITY of natural bodybuilders and other lifters who have built big muscles using splits, not TBT.

Please explain how they are idiotic. I mentioned drugs because they are relevant to the topic. We are discussing training methods on a bodybuilding forum. If you don’t have anything to add then simply don’t participate.

[/quote]

What I said addresses both of your “fundamental issues”, asshole. Please re-read and reply.

58

there are retired pro bodybuilders who are completely DRUG!!FREE!!! and still do split training they are no longer freakishly huge but are larger and in better shape than most people at any local gym!

some of the retired pros are FLEX WHEELER, SHAWN RAY, DORIAN YATES, RICH GASPARI, LEE LABRADA, THE GREAT LEE HANEY dont’ you think they would train differently if it was more productive for a natural person.

59

[quote]trextacy wrote:
hungry4more wrote:
trextacy wrote:
On the charge that no bodybuilders use full body- i have provided MANY non-Waterbury examples.

I don’t think we’re debating what bodybuilders USE. It’s what they USED to get to where they currently are. And please, show me all these bodybuilders who got big (not maintained their size) on full body training, I would actually find that cool.

There actually isn’t a debate on this thread. It was started so people who deride proponents of full body methods can continue to complain (ironic considering they wanted the debate to go away).

There a 2 fundamental issues. First, there is the assertion that splits are vastly superior to full body approaches because pros use splits. Someone like me would say that logic is flawed when applied to a natural trainer because it doesn’t take into account the drug use component.

I would say that you can’t isolate the training variable because there are other variables (i.e. drug use) that skew the results. The fact that it’s there job (so, unlimited time and focus on bb-ing is a factor) is another factor, but not as important as the drugs.

People who act like aas and hormones are only a modest factor are kidding themselves. It isn’t just like supplements, and the shit works amazingly…if that wasn’t the case they wouldn’t do it. Period. So, that argument is a non-starter.

There may be other reasons splits are superior, but “because pros do/did it” is not a good one. This is pure intuition/opinion, but I think if you take drugs out of the equation, old school bbers who did full body (Reg Park, Steve Reeves, Grimek, etc.) would compare much more favorably with modern pros.

The other issue (the one that I find more interesting and worthy of discussion) is whether anyone with any “credibility” advocates full body training for packing on mass. I will exclude Waterbury from the discussion because, right or wrong, he has no credibility with most of the T-Cell guys.

I would say that bbers and respected trainers fall into this category, so what they do or recommend is relevant.

My only point is that full body can add large amounts of muscle and that splitting things out can be good for advanced bbers who need to focus on specific bodyparts or move so much weight that it makes sense. Or if they want to add a high volume cycle.

I also think that full body has benefits over splits for most people because it can eliminate training ADD and analysis paralysis and requires that the focus be on compounds (not to the exclusion of isolation movements though).

Here are some examples of bbers and trainers who advocate this approach (note that I don’t mention madcow, texas method, rippetoe or starr because the powers that be have already said they don’t “count”-lol).

Steve Reeves- he did full body and a 3-way split, but full body was his go-to for adding mass.

Reg Park- here are 2 T-Nation articles from the last few months that highlight his methods and the results:

Mike Mahler:The Reg Park Way To Serious Size And Strength

T-Nation editors:

HST- Hypertrophy Specific Training:
www.hypertrophy-specific.com/about.html

Thibadeau:
http://www.T-Nation.com/free_online_article/sports_body_training_performance_bodybuilding/mondays_with_thibs_the_reality_show_mass_circuit

Joel Marion: Stripped down hypertrophy:

Sensible Training by Dr. Leisnter:

www.cyberpump.com/preview/sense.html

These are just a few. Again, remember that the focus is adding as much muscle mass as possible while training naturally.

I think for many guys, training the basic compounds movements on a 3 day per week schedule (ABA, then BAB) works very well if consuming a caloric surplus and progression is there. for example:

A:
Squats
Bench
Rows
(some arm isolation)

B:
Deadlift
Military/overhead press
chins
(some calves/abs isolation)

have a heavy day (4x6, 5x5) and lighter day (3x10, 2x15) for each. Add weight or reps every time. Every 8 weeks, sub in cg bench, sl deads or whatever. Train with a focus and intensity that would frighten people.

I think that if someone eats big and clean, gets rest and progresses on the above for 3 years, you will see someone who is ahead of 99% of people. No log books or spreadsheets, no worrying about the optimum # of sets, reps, no worrying about exercise selection, no training ADD, no stressing about their split.

They will be big and strong as fuck. Then, if they want to add in more volume PER SESSION (remember, splits only have a volume advantage on a per session basis, with total weekly volume being roughly equivalent often times) then they can do that for a cycle and reap the benefits.

I would assert that they will be glad they waited and “reserved” that tool for use after they have pushed ahead with what I set out above and will get far more results from it then if they had started out that way.

Let me reiterate that I respect guys like X and ceph_carn who feel otherwise but hope that you can see where I’m coming from. This is a forum for discussing bodybuilding.
[/quote]

Listen, forget about pro-IFBB bodybuilders who take drugs. You are aware that there are drug free competitions out there, right? Sure, different associations have different definitions of what ‘drug free’ is (for some you have to be drug free for only a few years, others require you to be drug free for life).

But of the drug-free bodybuilder profiles I’ve read I’ve still never heard of any of them training using Full Body routines.

You’re putting in a lot of effort citing popular authors who recommend TBT but your arguments fail to deliver any sort of knock-out punch because none of these authors or experts have with any sort of consistency produced BIG MEN while using TBT in the last 10-15 years ! Let that sink in for a moment…

Fine, we get it, we should stop bringing up CW because his idea of TBT is maybe not the same as yours (consider it done), but let’s look at the authors/systems you have brought up:

Before I continue, let me say that I don’t care for a moment how articulate these individuals are or how strong their arguments appear to be - I’m judging them based solely on real world results.

HST: Great read, but I cannot think of a single individual who has gotten from skinny/average to, at least, Golden Age huge. If you can post some pictures of someone who has gotten big using that system please post them.

Joel Marion: He’s has a full body routine, but again, who do you know who has gotten big using it? Certainly not Joel! I’ve been reading his stuff from all the way back when he won the EAS body transformation and I know he didn’t get big using TBT.

Reg park: Ok, he got pretty big using TBT, but it reportedly took him around 3 hours per session 3 times per week (or 9 hours per week) to complete. Do you think all the pro-TBT guys are training 3 hours per session?

That’s a greater time and volume (tonnage lifted) investment than most split trainees invest (yes, the same split routines that are best suited for steroid users… /sarcasm). Not to mention that he later abandoned TBT and switched to split training because he stated it was better for bodybuilding

PS: If TBT is better suited for natural trainees because traditional split routines have too much volume, how do you explain Reg training at volumes higher than split routines?

Mike Mahler: Who has he gotten big using TBT? Himself? While he definitely looks like an athletic guy - “big” or “muscular” are not words I would use to describe him.

I’m not even comparing him to modern IFBB pros, but Reg Park (who trained around 9 hours per week - greater than modern day split routines). That’s not a knock on the guy. If that’s the look he wants and the look you’re after - then all the power to both of you.

But his low time investment TBT routines have never proved they could produce a physique remotely similar to today’s drug free lifters… or Golden age lifters.

I don’t know anything about Dr. Leisnter, so I won’t comment on him.

Now, before you feel the need to pick apart some of my points can you please show evidence that any of the guys and their TBT systems you mentioned have gotten a skinny or average dude to at least Reg Park huge with any sort of consistency? Because that’s the only think that counts. Anything else is just theory.

60

[quote]brancron wrote:
trextacy wrote:
brancron wrote:
Trextacy, go suck a bag of dicks. Your arguments are idiotic. Stop fucking mentioning pro BBs/drugs, and look at the VAST MAJORITY of natural bodybuilders and other lifters who have built big muscles using splits, not TBT.

Please explain how they are idiotic. I mentioned drugs because they are relevant to the topic. We are discussing training methods on a bodybuilding forum. If you don’t have anything to add then simply don’t participate.

What I said addresses both of your “fundamental issues”, asshole. Please re-read and reply.[/quote]

Not sure why so hostile. Anyways, I pointed out the many credible sources for the type of training I am advocating. I also explained why IFBB pros aren’t good to emulate. I re-read and don’t see anything other than insults and a broad claim you can’t really support.

For the record, I consider something like DC to be more what I’m about and not on the “split” side of things. DC is a simple 2-way split and has more in common with what I am advocating than it does with, say, a 5-way bodypart split where each part is hit once per week.

This thread is specifically about the way pros train and I’m saying that isn’t optimal for naturals. DC is all about growing 100+ times per year than 52. Again with the frequency…