3 Likes
where is this scientific evidence that bodybuilders do better splitting their sets up over the week?
I know t-nation doesnāt allow links to competing articles, but Iām sure the articles themselves reference the actual scientific text, which you could link toā¦
Are you serious?
If I take 100 natural athletes put them on the same split but, in half (group 2) divide the volume over two sessions with the results showing they gained more muscle you would argue against that?
I would argue that one study for a limited amount of time is not indicative of what is an overall best program for long-term use. Additionally, as itās been said literally countless times on here which either youāre not reading or maybe or just not wishing to respond to because it is in disagreement with your thoughts, there is no one ideal program. Try saying that to yourself like 3000 times until maybe it sinks in.
Hereās an article by Clay Hyght. Aside from his credentials, heās competed and has been training, as many folks on this forum have, for longer than youāve been alive which also somehow still doesnāt phase you.
11 Principles of Bodybuilding Training - Part 1. So thereās some good research showing once per week is optimal. Iāll say again that there are MANY studies that show MANY different results.
I want to mention that I did not start this thread but, gave my opinion on what would be best for naturals (of which is backed by studies,research, science). Which is exactly what Brick did. Difference is I have followed the research as well as evidence by coaches (for naturals) as opposed to anecdotal proof by, lets be honest mostly enhanced athletes.
Saying "I do not give a shit about any āscienceā showing you canāt target a portion of a muscle. I really donāt! " is very Prof.X likeā¦
j/k
I will concede that at the end of the day even if āmy methodā gave better results it is not going to be 25lbs of muscle difference. I was simply arguing what would be OPTIMAL. Life does not always allow for optimal and if one prefers splits to say full body training who cares if they miss out on a few lbs of muscle adherence to a plan above all important.
You have no idea how ignorant you sound.
you think people on here like myself, brick and others done follow research or science? What EVERYONE on here is saying is that is taken as a guide to form a program, and through years and years of trial and error, find what works best for them. Because you have barely been training for any reasonable amount of time, you do not have the experience yet to understand this. You do not have the experience to know that everyone responds different and one personās best program will be someone elseās worst program. And if you step 300 natural athletes in the room and had them all on the same program, every single one of them would have different results. The difference is while someone else might realize They donāt have the experience and might just wait longer to form these kind of opinions, you think because youāve read a couple of studies that say one thing those are gospel anyone that is doing anything else other than that is not doing what is optimal.
I am by no means an expert, but Iāve had enough experience to know what works best for me, which I started figuring out by reading literally thousands of articles, and over the years trying things out until I found what works best for me.
2 Likes
I love how you speak in absolutes. 
Additionally, please donāt misunderstand me. There is nothing wrong about giving your opinion and having conversation and debating topics, thatās what these threads are meant for. The fact that you disagree is obviously your right. But I do think itās ridiculous for someone with very limited personal experience to be telling older, wiser, infinitely more experienced people that theyāre wrong because you read it somewhere.
Not to jump on anyone here, but I believe that the current obsession with quoting studies has hurt more people than helped. It used to be that āknowledgableā trainers understood the basics, and by commited adherence over time you could pretty much feel secure in making progress.
Now we have studies, rarely if ever done ON actual Bodybuilders, performed BY people who may have competed but never been top competitors themselves, looking at TINY variables that donāt mean jack unless all of the bottom requirements of your pyramid of bodybuilding needs are met, being QUOTED as the holy grail by anyone who has an interest in bodybuilding as if it somehow gives them the credibility to argue that their lack of physique doesnāt.
(Howās that for a run on sentence Colucci?! -lol)
S
4 Likes
So we still donāt have a definitive as to whatās best? Lol wow
brick, well done on your prep, was looking through it last night and was very impressed.
I have a question if you wouldnāt mind, do you genuinely believe that you have added size to your chest during the prep or could it be illusion with the level of leanness achieved?
I think my chest always looks better the leaner i am, my upper chest looks less developed if Iām at slightly higher
fat levels
Do you mind sharing your chest routine with the pre exhausting? Thanks
1 Like
Can I point something out here? The concept of the 7-day week developed wholly independent of the physiology of the human body. That is, the reason there are seven days in a week (as opposed to three, or five, or nineteen, etc) has nothing to do with human metabolism; rather, it is because the number 7 has special significance with respect to ancient astronomical observations and religious beliefs.
My point is this: Given that the duration of a week bears no causal relationship with human physiology, it would be a coincidence of astonishing proportions if it turned out that working a bodypart once per weekāthat is to say, once per this completely arbitrary unit of timeājust so happened to be the most efficient way to build muscle. (Doesnāt mean it canāt be the case, of course.)
4 Likes
I canāt grow training only once a week but im not on gear either. I train most muscle groups twice a week and legs once a week. Iām getting good results.
1 Like
Hence weāve said once every five to seven days repeatedly.
If only there were some ābodybuildersā (how do we define that objectively for a scientific study?) that were willing to submit themselves to a standardized & controlled workout and nutrition plan created by the study designer(s) that may or may not work.
Grants? Unlikely, Iām sure a supplement company would be willing to fund it. Ha!
But seriously, there are so many variables to control to make that a solid study, lolā¦nutrition, training, rest, day job, sleep, sex? Just to name a few.
2 Likes
@BrickHead could you speak a bit more about exercise sequencing? This is a variable that you reference consistently, but which means very different things to different people. Do you follow a Mountain Dog style pre-pump > mechanical tension > max pump > stretch model? Very curious about what you have found to be the most effective for yourself.
1 Like
I think weāve all been on some bandwagon study which showed a particular protocol added 25% more muscle. I remember when eccentrics were the answer to all our woes.
After youāve seen a bunch of these come through you understand to look for the underlying principles which dont really ever change, we may understand them a bit better though.
The stuff that works tends to bubble to the top well before any scientific breakthrough anyway and psychology always trumps physiology.
1 Like
I guess the answer to the OP question is: No.
Iām getting a headache.
2 Likes
1 Like
Yes, I will return to discuss.
I doubt anyone in this thread is enhanced and weāve gotten good results with methods used by those who are enhanced! One guy here is a natural pro who uses splits with himself and clients and tolerates a shot ton of volume, that guy bring Stu! I myself have worked up to handling quality volume with relatively short rest periods.