It’s funny b/c you’ll probably turn this, in your head, into being chastised for going against the norm, but it’s really because you’re an idiot.
[quote]That One Guy wrote:
It’s funny b/c you’ll probably turn this, in your head, into being chastised for going against the norm, but it’s really because you’re an idiot.[/quote]
Fucking this^
So bad this^
[quote]That One Guy wrote:
You’ve yet to explain how looking good naked and bodybuilding are completely unrelated.[/quote]
They are sorta related. People that want to look good naked, want to look good naked for the ladies. The “bodybuilders” on this site want to look good for the bros. on this site.
[quote]RiVaL6 wrote:
And lastly, it’s obvious that SPLIT training is superior to tbt for bodyubuilding, for now.
I couldn’t name you one successful bodybuilder who won championships with tbt. [/quote]
Well, not in the last 50 years anyway.
[quote]dankid wrote:
That One Guy wrote:
You’ve yet to explain how looking good naked and bodybuilding are completely unrelated.
They are sorta related. People that want to look good naked, want to look good naked for the ladies. The “bodybuilders” on this site want to look good for the bros. on this site.[/quote]
Whatever helps you get through the day kid.
[quote]RiVaL6 wrote:
austin_bicep wrote:
RiVaL6 wrote:
Wilba wrote:
It wasn’t all at once. It was a long period of stagnation. Also complicated by a couple of injuries. I did increase my calories by 400 + 40g protein. I also hadn’t changed things up in a long time. I was wondering if anyone had any experience with a setup like this or opinion. I am not saying splits are bad.
Seems like I may not have been clear enough that I’ve always done splits (for years), made much progress over the years. I just tried this a few weeks ago and have had good results so far. So don’t think I’m a full body guy, I have never been. Just trying something new for a little while so don’t be a dick.
everyone underestimates TBT for gaining mass.
when you’re working in only 1 - 3 sets per body part a day, that leaves u with enough energy to push in 1 - 3 more sets, 2 or 3 more times a week. whereas a split routine leaves you only one day to severely punish one muscle group.
i also find tbt to be muchhhh more entertaining than split routines…
ever try super setting deadlifts into pull ups? fucking sexy
-That’s the point, but you have it backwards, 1-3 sets per boypart a day 2-3 times a week is much less volume and taxing than when I hit 12-16 sets on chest. I like to kill my muscle in order to make it adapt, I’m usually sore for days after a workout and it lets me know I’m growing. I don’t think I’d feel the effects of TBT like that. Plus, I couldn’t heavy bench 3 days a week or even do any heavy variations of the bench press three times a week. I’d have to use relatively light weight every time I trained or I’d have a torn pec in weeks. Plus when doing a ton of other movements for my entire body I could never hit each muscle as hard as I could.
i agree. more volume is needed to demand growth from the muscle.
btw, i highly doubt you’d tear a pec from benching 3 sets a day, 3 days a week.
With tbt, you can hit the muscles, multiple times a week, and with greater intensity.
im gonna revert to the whole I,Bodybuilder philosophy because its whats familiar. its not necessarily the amount of weight your able to move, but the “intended exertion” that fully stimulates the muscle fibers. with 12+ sets, you can only strain your CNS so much. By the 12th set, the body and the mind are drained. when both are not in sync, you lose the efficacy of the lift… or rather the muscle building effect.
“so you’re saying tbt is superior to split training for bodybuilding?”
no motherfucker, im saying that there are possibilities
i wouldnt suggest a new lifter take part in a bodybuilders split routine. the volume would be way too much stress on the joints and extensors. And thisss is where you would tear a pec or develop a tight piriformis and get yo posture all fucked up.
And lastly, it’s obvious that SPLIT training is superior to tbt for bodyubuilding, for now.
I couldn’t name you one successful bodybuilder who won championships with tbt.
[/quote]
Not that I’m the benching king, cause some dudes shit on me here, but doing 350+ x 3 on flat bench 3 times a week with 1 day rest between session is going to cause an injury for me even if it’s only 3 sets.
As far as being able to hit each muscle more intensly, How so? Intensity on a split is giving your all devoted to one muscle group or two and TBT is trying to give your all to your entire body which in return is harder to do and thus leaves me to conclude I can train more intensly with a split.
I know you’re not saying TBT is better for bodybuilding…
To drive the point home further, something I don;t think that is mentioned often is this.
When we lift, not every muscle fiber is being stimulated during the movement. The more we fatigue the muscle, the more fibers get recruited to help out as the primary fibers are being weakened. With this being said 3 sets is not enough fatigue to activate as many fiber as me doing 12 sets on a bodypart.
Plus I’ve been hitting each muscle directly once a week for almost a year now and have never seen better strength gains as well as size. The past month alone I’ve put 10 pounds on every lift in the same rep range, I have 1.25 pound plates I’ve been adding to the bar each week. I’ve also put 20 pounds on my deadlift and squat in the same rep range as well. I think I’ll stick with split training.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
RiVaL6 wrote:
And lastly, it’s obvious that SPLIT training is superior to tbt for bodyubuilding, for now.
I couldn’t name you one successful bodybuilder who won championships with tbt.
Well, not in the last 50 years anyway.
[/quote]
Interesting. Is this related to the fact that steroids were not in circulation more than 50 years ago?
Before the invention of steroids the tried and true way to build an impressive physique was through (you guessed it) intense knee bends done multiple times per week. John Grimek, a founder of bodybuildng and winner of many of the early bb competitions as well as olympic weightlifting competitons, is a good example.
Back then, this was the physique covering the magazines.
[quote]dankid wrote:
This really makes no sense. So 3x a week makes your legs and torso muscles really big, but leaves the smaller muscles underdeveloped? Maybe they need to be trained 4x per week?
[/quote]
It makes sense because by the time you get done training squat, bench press, power clean, and chinups, you’re not going to have much energy to spend on biceps and calves. Are you going to spend 3 or 4 days per week training your biceps? No, because the way to make a muscle stronger is to stress it and then allow enough time for recovery. When you exert all your energy on major lifts it’s going to be very difficult to have enough energy to stress the little muscles enough to grow in the proportion that a bodybuilding judge would value. By that I mean a man/woman that watches a bodybuilder pose and then rates their physique based on their perception of the perfect physique. Does that make any sense?
[quote]That One Guy wrote:
It’s funny b/c you’ll probably turn this, in your head, into being chastised for going against the norm, but it’s really because you’re an idiot.[/quote]
That’s an astute observation. I think you pretty much nailed dankid’s mental state right there.
[quote]KyleT wrote:
Before the invention of steroids the tried and true way to build an impressive physique was through (you guessed it) intense knee bends done multiple times per week. John Grimek, a founder of bodybuildng and winner of many of the early bb competitions as well as olympic weightlifting competitons, is a good example.
[/quote]
Please don’t tell me you are mocking John Grimek. Please don’t tell me you are a complete f’ing idiot. Maybe I misunderstand your post. But you sound like a real ignorant jackass with your knee-bends comment. KNEE BENDS ARE SQUATS.
Guys, if you are going to request photos, first you need to provide photos. CURRENT photos.
Total body training is probably not the ideal way for most guys to get maximally big, but it’s also bullshit to immediately dismiss it as not being effective whatsoever, for anybody ever. Since we are all different, it makes sense that it would work better for some than for others. Any program can work as a change of pace.
People have gotten bigger using Nautilus. People have gotten bigger using circuit training. People have gotten bigger training like Mike Mentzer. Coach Thibaudeau says your specific weekly bodypart schedule (split) is the LEAST IMPORTANT parameter as far as progress.
[quote]KyleT wrote:
It makes sense because by the time you get done training squat, bench press, power clean, and chinups, you’re not going to have much energy to spend on biceps and calves. Are you going to spend 3 or 4 days per week training your biceps? No, because the way to make a muscle stronger is to stress it and then allow enough time for recovery. When you exert all your energy on major lifts it’s going to be very difficult to have enough energy to stress the little muscles enough to grow in the proportion that a bodybuilding judge would value.
[/quote]
You don’t do the exact same workout every time you are in the gym, in order to do a whole-body training routine. So there’s no reason that curls wouldn’t be included, on some days. You don’t know what you’re talking about.
[quote]RiVaL6 wrote:
“so you’re saying tbt is superior to split training for bodybuilding?”
no motherfucker, im saying that there are possibilities
[/quote]
+1
[quote]KyleT wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
RiVaL6 wrote:
And lastly, it’s obvious that SPLIT training is superior to tbt for bodyubuilding, for now.
I couldn’t name you one successful bodybuilder who won championships with tbt.
Well, not in the last 50 years anyway.
Interesting. Is this related to the fact that steroids were not in circulation more than 50 years ago?[/quote]
I don’t think so.
Rather it is related to knowledge increasing with time.
You’d be hard-pressed today, or during that same 50 year period, to find high-level natural bb’ers who favor TBT over split routines.
[quote]K2000 wrote:
Total body training is probably not the ideal way for most guys to get maximally big,
[/quote]
This…x2
Some of you do realize you’re in a bodybuilding forum? Correct?
If I’m hitting say legs or bench. Better believe my intensity is going to be through the fuckin’ roof and no way in hell am I going to be able to hit them again 2 days later.
I put girls/rank beginners on an upper/lower body split. Cause I feel it’s superior and so do guys like Charles Poliquin/Joe Defranco. Splits are consistently more effective over the long haul.
[quote]K2000 wrote:
KyleT wrote:
Before the invention of steroids the tried and true way to build an impressive physique was through (you guessed it) intense knee bends done multiple times per week. John Grimek, a founder of bodybuildng and winner of many of the early bb competitions as well as olympic weightlifting competitons, is a good example.
Please don’t tell me you are mocking John Grimek. Please don’t tell me you are a complete f’ing idiot. Maybe I misunderstand your post. But you sound like a real ignorant jackass with your knee-bends comment. KNEE BENDS ARE SQUATS.
Guys, if you are going to request photos, first you need to provide photos. CURRENT photos.
Total body training is probably not the ideal way for most guys to get maximally big, but it’s also bullshit to immediately dismiss it as not being effective whatsoever, for anybody ever. Since we are all different, it makes sense that it would work better for some than for others. Any program can work as a change of pace.
People have gotten bigger using Nautilus. People have gotten bigger using circuit training. People have gotten bigger training like Mike Mentzer. Coach Thibaudeau says your specific weekly bodypart schedule (split) is the LEAST IMPORTANT parameter as far as progress.
[/quote]
THIS IS A BODYBUILDING FORUM YOU ARE POSTING IN. The goal is NOT to just gain some amount of muscle. The goal is to gain as much muscle as humanly possible with the stipulation that it look balanced over your entire body and approaches some form of aesthetics.
Do you and those like you understand that now?
I am not interested in whether someone can gain any amount of muscle at all using TBT. No one has EVER fucking stated that gaining any muscle at all is impossible using TBT. No one has ever stated that TBT will work for no one in terms of getting extremely big. However, most of the REALLY BIG and REALLY STRONG people on the planet did NOT get that way using a fucking TBT routine…and that very few of the fuckers on this site exclaiming how great it is even look impressive at all.
[quote]Wilba wrote:
I’ve always done a split routine but had not been making gains and had not been as motivated as usual so decided to try something new. I didn’t like what I found for full body routines, mostly 1 or 2 sets of a dozen exercises. I came up with the following, let me know what you think. I’ve been getting extra reps and or lbs on a few exercieses and am up 5 pounds in the month I’ve been doing this.
A- flat barbell bench, deadlifts, chins/dips
B- squats, barbell overhead press, dips/chins
C- incline dumbell bench, dumbell rows, close grip bench, pull ups
D- dumbell clean and press, barbell curls, triceps ext, split squats, ab wheel
[/quote]
Hey, you can definitely gain muscle through a full body workout. I was like you. I didn’t see how you could do it but it is very possible. You can keep the same routine that you are doing but change the weigh. For example if you are doing flat bench barbell. Do three to four sets. when you are done with the first two sets increase the weight.
By doing this I noticed that I actually got bigger and alot leaner too. I usually do anywhere from 8 to 12 reps. I usually start it out at 12 reps each for up to 3 weeks and then go down to 8 reps each sets.
I should have known this thread would turn into what it has become.
The funny thing is that what I’m doing isn’t really TBT. More of a mixed up split. What I’ve learned most from the last few weeks is that I really like training flat bench and deadlifts on the same day. I’m crushed when I finish and have some major soreness the next few days. I also learned that I don’t change what I’m doing frequently enough.
I’m currently trying to gain as much size and strength as I can in the next 4 or 5 months. I’m going to stick with this routine through Thanksgiving weekend and then go back to a more traditional split.
To give a general philosophical view which probably as usual will go up the flagpole with no one saluting:
In all these things, one should not put broad theory first.
For example, what I’m doing right now some people would classify as “push/pull” and then might declaim that push/pull is not best for bb’ing, or whatever.
But first, I am not arranging what I am doing out of a push/pull theory. I couldn’t give a flip whether I am pulling or pushing on each exercise.
And second, for example I am doing biceps on the same day as chest and shoulders, and calf raises (which are push) on the same day as back work.
And further, this is for only 3 weeks, and what may be best for a person at a given point in time for a few weeks may not be the same as what is best for him as the most usual staple.
But my point here is not on that specific, but on the general principle.
I am doing what I am doing because I am aiming to train given muscles with given emphasis and amounts of rest days, and being cognizant of whether there are conflicts in how I have the exercises arranged.
Regardless of whether I have a 5-way split or a 3-way split or a 2-way or whatever I’m doing – and also with regard to what you are doing in your current “mixed-up split” program – the reason is not because of conforming to a broad theory such as TBT or push-pull or “using Dorian’s split,” but because of having the above purposes and considerations in mind.
I think too many fall into the error of putting the theory first.
That said, of course a given theory can be a guide, a starting point, or in many cases a good template. Or a theory differing from what one is now doing can often spur ideas about what might be good things to try.
For example, let’s say that someone has long been using a split where back and biceps are trained on the same day, with only one such day in the split. And the person reads Prof X’s post explaining a benefit of having them on different days. This could give the idea that they might take the biceps isolation exercises out of their back day and step up those back exercises that particularly work the biceps, and then on a different day hit their biceps isolation exercises harder than they ever did on their combined back/biceps day.
It’s not that their original theory was invalid, but that another theory can give an idea and might result in an adjustment. But either way, the theory should not come first.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
To give a general philosophical view which probably as usual will go up the flagpole with no one saluting:
In all these things, one should not put broad theory first.
For example, what I’m doing right now some people would classify as “push/pull” and then might declaim that push/pull is not best for bb’ing, or whatever.
But first, I am not arranging what I am doing out of a push/pull theory. I couldn’t give a flip whether I am pulling or pushing on each exercise.
And second, for example I am doing biceps on the same day as chest and shoulders, and calf raises (which are push) on the same day as back work.
And further, this is for only 3 weeks, and what may be best for a person at a given point in time for a few weeks may not be the same as what is best for him as the most usual staple.
But my point here is not on that specific, but on the general principle.
I am doing what I am doing because I am aiming to train given muscles with given emphasis and amounts of rest days, and being cognizant of whether there are conflicts in how I have the exercises arranged.
Regardless of whether I have a 5-way split or a 3-way split or a 2-way or whatever I’m doing – and also with regard to what you are doing in your current “mixed-up split” program – the reason is not because of conforming to a broad theory such as TBT or push-pull or “using Dorian’s split,” but because of having the above purposes and considerations in mind.
I think too many fall into the error of putting the theory first.
[/quote]
Exactly, the terms “TBT” and “Splits” are just terms used by people to categorize training splits. IMO the first organizational training thought should be to have a certain desired frequency in mind and to base training day design on balancing recovery and volume/intensity.