Sorry, ideal was a poor choice of words. There are other splits that will hit the muscle group multiple times a week which was the point I was trying to make.
I have not seen studies based on certain programs but, the science and research is there when it comes to intensity, volume, frequency, and exercise selection.
*Tnation does not allow the posting of links.
I understand what youâre saying, but you keep using studies and data and science to base your decisions, and the more you type the more it seems you havenât had the PERSONAL experience under the weights to know that âidealâ is a WIDELY VARYING word in bodybuilding. You have natural bodybuilders who compete on this forum saying, âhereâs what I did that worked for meâ and then you say âthat doesnât work because this study says itâs not ideal.â Youâll find countless articles, by very well respected athletes, scientists and such that will have contradicting info. Does that mean one is ârightâ and one is âwrong?â No, theyâre all right because everything works to some degree, but what matters most is what works best for the individual.
What kind of physique have you built with your methods? Any pics? And how long have you been training? Just wondering.
So, your totals came out to what I am saying a natural should do?
I am not arguing for a specific split/program, though I prefer p/p/l but, what should be done in terms of total volume, frequency, etc.
No my totals came out to more than what youâre saying a natural can do. And yes I understand youâre talking abour the research in terms of frequency and volume, and AGAIN I will say that is a STARTING point to trial on yourself and ultimately see what works best. Some might find using the âoptimalâ frequency according to available research is most certainly not optimal for them.
You still havenât answered my questions, not trying to be aggressive or anything, but how long have you been training, and what kind of physique have you built with your methods? What types of programs have you done in the past?
so 12 sets in a session is too much, but training 6x a week on P/P/L isnât?
-Training with strictly physique in mind maybe 2 yrs.
-For performance quite some time 7 years for cross country and soccer. Started when I was a freshman in high school.
-Lowest weight 130 lbs highest 212 lbs (not pretty). Today I woke up at a relatively lean 185.4 lbs
-I have tried everything out there. Due to performance gravitated towards full body, upper/lower, and p/p/l as regular splits left me to sore for both sports.
CT had posted the below split while stressing upon the need for frequency in a recent article:
Monday: Pecs, upper back
Tuesday: Lower body, quad dominant
Wednesday: Off
Thursday: Shoulders, biceps, triceps
Friday: Off
Saturday: Back, lower body (posterior chain dominant)
Sunday: Off
I find it a more economical and recovery friendly version of Push/Pull/Legs routine repeated twice a week. There will be no confusion if we consider the overlap in various muscle groups when following a BB split when Brick says [quote=âBrickHead, post:1, topic:221756â]
Ok thanks for sharing.
After training for aesthetic goals for âmaybeâ 2 years, you most certainly havenât tried âeverythingâ out there. I am not counting the sprints or running or whatever you did in high school for soccer and cross country because theyâre not weight training related. How tall are you? Just wondering as you wrote your lowest weight was 130 and highest was 212.
So letâs look at Clay Hyght, obviously a well respected author and bodybuilder, who says bodybuilders, for long term progress, should train a muscle once per week. Sometimes higher frequency can be good, but once per week is ideal. Judging by his advice, one could say that once per week program is the best split for physique related training. Since you PREFER another split for whatever reason (in your case sports performance), itâs not ideal FOR YOU.
Again total volume, reps, intensity must be taken into consideration.
Can you do 6 chest exercises for 4 sets each at 8-10 reps yes but, why would you? Is that best? How? At some point you are just going through the motions.
-12 sets total for chest 8-10 reps would fall between the weekly total that would be ideal but, would it not be better to split the volume up to hit it better, fresher, etc next time? Research shows that it is.
I guess I donât follow this line of reasoning. What do you mean by âhit it better, fresherâŠâ? If you mean that splitting up the volume allows you to be more explosive, then sure. If you mean that splitting up the volume allows you to use more weight in a given exercise because youâre less exhausted from previous exercisesâŠthen sure. But that doesnât necessarily correlate to better muscle building and LBM gains. So are you just referring to it being better for you? As Rob said:
Yup, some splits allow for quite some overlap. Actually the split I used has been used by many, including Tom Venuto and Stu and⊠Dorian Yates, Johhny Jackson, and Jay Cutler. But hey, what can we learn from pro bodybuilders?!
RE:-â12 sets total for chest 8-10 reps would fall between the weekly total that would be ideal but, would it not be better to split the volume up to hit it better, fresher, etc next time? Research shows that it is.â
Not when considering exercise sequence and pre exhaust in REALITY! And other issues and factors, which you keep ignoring or have no experience with or personal observation oelf those close to you. I donât say this dismissively.
why are you using an example which is much higher than the 12 sets we were talking about? 6 x 4 = 24. I donât see the relevance of that.
I think where you and I fundamentally disagree is that 12 sets for chest is easy peasy for me (even when Iâm not on da joos), but 6 sessions in a week is murder.
exactly. The shit just works.
Dude why are you not able to grasp this concept. My head is getting sore from banging it against a wall.
It does. Studies have shown it. As I said T-nation does not allow certain links.
How many of these researchers compete in bodybuilding?
Researchers themselves? Who knows. Coaches that have taken the research and applied it to themselves as well as hundreds of clients most naturals who have won pro cardsâŠ
If research told you that the sky is black, but everybody around you told you that, through anecdotal experience, they know the sky to be blue, would you tell those people that they are wrong because research says so?
What is your overriding grievance? Lol.