[quote]dankid wrote:
All trolling aside, I see it as this.
.
.
.
It doesn’t have anything to do with us knowning more now. If anything, we know less as far as physique training goes.[/quote]
One of the above is a lie. Pick wisely.
Heres Reg park from the 1950’s PRE STEROID ERA AFAIK.
Reg Park’s program circa 1950 (from an old Iron Man issue from around 1985)
Mon - Wed - Fri
- Barbell Curl 4x6-8
- Seated Behind Neck Press 4x6-8
- Bench Press 5x5
- Barbell Row 4x6-8
- Barbell Squat 5x5
- Deadlift 5x5
jus sayin’ 
[quote]Bingbeast wrote:
just left the gym. There was only 3 people in the gym. There was this 135lbs dood wearing a skin tight Under Armor shirt (just trying to paint a picture here), performing (from what i saw) db curls, ez bar curls, concentration curls, hammer curls, rope extensions, kickbacks and a fuct-up version of skullcrushers (All the while texting on his cellphone every few minutes). Clearly this guy likes doing ‘arm’ day on monday.
this guy could be doing a TBT, split, tantric yoga, inverted pilates… whatever but i guarantee you he will always be a little bitch. [/quote]
WTF is an under armour shirt LOL?
[quote]Bingbeast wrote:
just left the gym. There was only 3 people in the gym. There was this 135lbs dood wearing a skin tight Under Armor shirt (just trying to paint a picture here), performing (from what i saw) db curls, ez bar curls, concentration curls, hammer curls, rope extensions, kickbacks and a fuct-up version of skullcrushers (All the while texting on his cellphone every few minutes). Clearly this guy likes doing ‘arm’ day on monday.
this guy could be doing a TBT, split, tantric yoga, inverted pilates… whatever but i guarantee you he will always be a little bitch. [/quote]
WTF was the point of this post? That you waste time in the gym watching idiots train?
[quote]ect0m0rph wrote:
Heres Reg park from the 1950’s PRE STEROID ERA AFAIK.
Reg Park’s program circa 1950 (from an old Iron Man issue from around 1985)
Mon - Wed - Fri
- Barbell Curl 4x6-8
- Seated Behind Neck Press 4x6-8
- Bench Press 5x5
- Barbell Row 4x6-8
- Barbell Squat 5x5
- Deadlift 5x5
jus sayin’ ;)[/quote]
So what is the point? Are you saying the above proves something that was in question in this thread, or not saying that? If so, what such thing does it prove? I really don’t follow.
Or are you saying that if a person has the genetics of Reg Park, then he can look like the above with such a program carried out very diligently, though probably not literally this every single workout every single week? I don’t think that was in dispute.
But if you like discussing that particular picture, actually I think it illustrates some points working against what I think you are trying to say. At a glance I notice that his triceps development does not seem balanced to the rest of his physique by modern standards and almost undoubtedly is less than he could have achieved, and the same seems true for his medial delts.
And whaddya know, from the above workout list, if it really were typical with few or rare major exceptions, that outcome would be predicted.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
ect0m0rph wrote:
Heres Reg park from the 1950’s PRE STEROID ERA AFAIK.
Reg Park’s program circa 1950 (from an old Iron Man issue from around 1985)
Mon - Wed - Fri
- Barbell Curl 4x6-8
- Seated Behind Neck Press 4x6-8
- Bench Press 5x5
- Barbell Row 4x6-8
- Barbell Squat 5x5
- Deadlift 5x5
jus sayin’
So what is the point? Are you saying the above proves something that was in question in this thread, or not saying that? If so, what such thing does it prove? I really don’t follow.
Or are you saying that if a person has the genetics of Reg Park, then he can look like the above with such a program carried out very diligently, though probably not literally this every single workout every single week? I don’t think that was in dispute.[/quote]
What makes even less sense is people who clearly have genetics no where near any elite level who latch onto some of the most genetically gifted lifters of the 50’s to claim some type of superiority of a training routine…all while degrading other types of training by claiming that they ONLY work because the people are genetically gifted and/or use steroids.
None of this shit makes sense to anyone but the idiots who think they "choose to use their CNS to lift weights:.
[quote]ect0m0rph wrote:
WTF is an under armour shirt LOL?[/quote]
A rock, you must live under one.
[quote]dankid wrote:
But even for someone this strong 3x per week TBT can work very well. Tons of powerlifters do it.[/quote]
BS! Show me “tons” of lifters who do it. You’re just speaking out of your ass here.
Which powerlifters? Most do something like Westside involving an upper/lower body split. Hell Matt Kroc at times trains like guess what? A BODYBUILDER! Go read some logs @ EliteFTS and see for yourself.
[quote]dankid wrote:It really would come down to choice and when you are that strong, it probably would make more sense to go to an upper/lower or split. But that is not to say ANY of these methods are better.
I agree that the frequency of hitting each muscle is the primary factor, and as someone above mentioned even with a 5 day split, you are hitting most muscles 2x per week, because triceps are used on shoulder days and shoulders are used on chest day, etc.
If you view things as TRAINING MUSCLES vs. TRAINING MOVEMENTS then you are going to take the split approach, because its less confusing. And i know all the “advanced” members are going to try to claim that they know for a fact that TBT or training movements is inferior, but they dont. [/quote]
This is just idiotic. I might as well
No most of us don’t think training movements are inferior. You have it twisted. No it’s just not a bodybuilders goal. It is more sport/athlete related. Yet athletes should at times target muscles with a frequency like guess who? Bodybuilders…
[quote]dankid wrote:
Its really simple. You train the different lifts, get strong at them and eat a lot and your muscles get bigger. You should train them about 2x per week, or once every 5 days for maximal growth. You may want to use a split so you can have a a whole day where you can work shoulders from every different angle with many exercises (press, side raise, rear raise, front raise etc.) But this DEFINATELY isn’t necessary; especially if you’ll never be on stage. And I know the “advanced” members think they are doing justice by recommending that splits are better, but this is not an absolute fact. And they are doing just as much injustice as someone saying that splits are inferior, because there are just as many people if not more, that can get just as good if not better results with a simpler TBT type routine (Pressing with a side raise maybe).[/quote]
Wtf?
Show me pics of these people who are getting just as good of results, if not better.
I can count on one hand how many I’ve seen that stood out for me.
I literally have only seen 2 people on this whole site who impressed me with physiques built by full body routines. One being Alpha and the other a Natty bodybuilder (from a thread I can’t even remember)
[quote]Carlitosway wrote:
WTF was the point of this post? That you waste time in the gym watching idiots train?[/quote]
haha. of course not! I set up hidden cameras and watch it when i get home. duh.
my point is that if that guy joined this forum discussion and decided that he would take up a TBT split or a one bodypart a day split, it wouldn’t make a slight difference because the effort is just not there. If you do put in the 110% and have done so with different splits/programs etc. you will soon find out what works for you and what doesn’t.
[quote]mr popular wrote:
iwong wrote:
The whole reason split training came about was as a function of progressive overload.[/quote]
I agree with you 100% there
[quote]It didn’t take people all that long to realize they could lift more weight and make more progress if they weren’t trying to do everything all at once.
It’s no different than any other sport. You don’t train every aspect of football or soccer or martial arts in every single training session.[/quote]
I don’t think it was so much a function of not wanting to do everything, as it is a function of bringing up the weak link. Arnold is the classic example of why splits make more sense long term. He acknowledged that he had some lagging body parts in his physique and rather than just spending equal amounts of time with every body part, he instead devoted more time to improving the lagging ones.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
RiVaL6 wrote:
ever try super setting deadlifts into pull ups? fucking sexy
What kind of weights are you using on deads where you can superset them?
Jesus fucking Christ… this thread should be burned alive.
[/quote]
Simple, Deadlift heavy enough that you need to wear a pair of these!
Classic!!
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
But if you like discussing that particular picture, actually I think it illustrates some points working against what I think you are trying to say. At a glance I notice that he his triceps development does not seem balanced to the rest of his physique by modern standards and almost undoubtedly is less than he could have achieved, and the same seems true for his medial delts.
[/quote]
I’ve gotta admit, that of the old timers, I appreciate Reg’s Physique best. I hadn’t noticed the tris before, but I think the ‘small’ delts might just be relative to his long neck, or that his traps look like he’s carrying a hang glider on his back.
as far as the training goes, I think it exceedingly likely that if he were to be at his peak today, he’d be making use of: squat racks/power cages, protein powder, creatine, etc and probably a split a la Yates (I’m just making a guess on the last one, but I think it’s pretty likely.)
Also, he’d have probably squeezed a few more pounds onto his frame (no matter what his Butt Limit) & would come in a bit drier.
Reg Park was absolutely one of the greats.
By no means did I intend to sound differently (and I don’t think you took it to mean differently.)
And I agree, if he were training as a natural today he would be even better. There actually has been a thing or two learned in the last 50 years.
When I first started training I did full body (at least what I thought was relatively full body) dumbbell routines every other day. I went front 150-160 in a month or so. I used 35lb dumbbells. Once I realized that 35lbs was no longer challenging in any exercise, I joined a gym in hopes of taking my training up a notch with a five day split. From what I had read, this was the way to go. All my friends were all about this style of training.
I had absolutely terrible results with this design. I eventually realized I was too weak to train this way. This is when I stumbled upon Rippetoe’s, made the change and haven’t looked back. I know eventually the weight I’ll be lifting will be too much for my body to recover from in one day, but until that happens I’ll gladly follow a full-body routine. I never liked split training even though I wanted to. I just hate having a “shoulder day,” ya know? However, a lot of my friends (one in particular who is at like 225 and single digit body fat) started on split routines and to this day swears by them.
Also, to the people saying they couldn’t bench three days a week on a full body routine with their enormous bench numbers, well then only bench one or two days a week. I always liked:
Mon - Bench
Wed - Press
Fri - Dips
I think people automatically assume they’re confined to the basic five lifts in a total body routine or are benching every time they lift. There are many options. And as much as I would like to support the OP for his new found love for TBT, his arguments aren’t very solid. A lesson that I’m slowly learning is listen to the veterans around here dude. Unless of course, they try and talk you out of wearing skinny jeans.
[quote]Mad_Duck wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
But if you like discussing that particular picture, actually I think it illustrates some points working against what I think you are trying to say. At a glance I notice that he his triceps development does not seem balanced to the rest of his physique by modern standards and almost undoubtedly is less than he could have achieved, and the same seems true for his medial delts.
I’ve gotta admit, that of the old timers, I appreciate Reg’s Physique best. I hadn’t noticed the tris before, but I think the ‘small’ delts might just be relative to his long neck, or that his traps look like he’s carrying a hang glider on his back.
as far as the training goes, I think it exceedingly likely that if he were to be at his peak today, he’d be making use of: squat racks/power cages, protein powder, creatine, etc and probably a split a la Yates (I’m just making a guess on the last one, but I think it’s pretty likely.)
Also, he’d have probably squeezed a few more pounds onto his frame (no matter what his Butt Limit) & would come in a bit drier. [/quote]
While impressive for his era, he wouldn’t win too many contests today (if any at all) in that condition. His upper chest is lagging along with front delts, medial delts and legs. He is also way too smooth for contests today at the professional level.
There is no doubt that if he were just starting today that his efforts would have been to more balanced according to our current standards as well as be more dried out.
That is why looking at these guys as if this is all they could achieve is ridiculous. t was a different era and they were legit FREAKS of that time period. No one thought men could look like that before they did…just like people who follow Butt’s bullshit believe no one today can reach much above 200lbs without a steroid IV drip.
[quote]ckallander wrote:
When I first started training I did full body (at least what I thought was relatively full body) dumbbell routines every other day. I went front 150-160 in a month or so. I used 35lb dumbbells. Once I realized that 35lbs was no longer challenging in any exercise, I joined a gym in hopes of taking my training up a notch with a five day split. From what I had read, this was the way to go. All my friends were all about this style of training.
I had absolutely terrible results with this design. I eventually realized I was too weak to train this way. This is when I stumbled upon Rippetoe’s, made the change and haven’t looked back. I know eventually the weight I’ll be lifting will be too much for my body to recover from in one day, but until that happens I’ll gladly follow a full-body routine. I never liked split training even though I wanted to. I just hate having a “shoulder day,” ya know? However, a lot of my friends (one in particular who is at like 225 and single digit body fat) started on split routines and to this day swears by them.
Also, to the people saying they couldn’t bench three days a week on a full body routine with their enormous bench numbers, well then only bench one or two days a week. I always liked:
Mon - Bench
Wed - Press
Fri - Dips
I think people automatically assume they’re confined to the basic five lifts in a total body routine or are benching every time they lift. There are many options. And as much as I would like to support the OP for his new found love for TBT, his arguments aren’t very solid. A lesson that I’m slowly learning is listen to the veterans around here dude. Unless of course, they try and talk you out of wearing skinny jeans. [/quote]
WTF? You’re the guy who looks like a woman and wears skinny jeans all of the time. Why the hell would ANYONE listen to you about how to train?
You don’t even look like you lift weights!
I mean, if guys like you, what I might even call “genetically not made for this”, are the ones making the calls for what works, excuse me while I run in the other direction.
This topic is now a joke.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
WTF? You’re the guy who looks like a woman and wears skinny jeans all of the time. Why the hell would ANYONE listen to you about how to train?
You don’t even look like you lift weights!
I mean, if guys like you, what I might even call “genetically not made for this”, are the ones making the calls for what works, excuse me while I run in the other direction.
This topic is now a joke.[/quote]
I wasn’t trying to give advice dude. I was merely showing that you don’t have to bench three days a week on a full body routine. I gave my story of why I train full body. I AM NOT TELLING ANYONE TO DO ANYTHING. In fact, I actually totally agree with you on this thread up until you dicked me in ass… so good.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Mad_Duck wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
But if you like discussing that particular picture, actually I think it illustrates some points working against what I think you are trying to say. At a glance I notice that he his triceps development does not seem balanced to the rest of his physique by modern standards and almost undoubtedly is less than he could have achieved, and the same seems true for his medial delts.
I’ve gotta admit, that of the old timers, I appreciate Reg’s Physique best. I hadn’t noticed the tris before, but I think the ‘small’ delts might just be relative to his long neck, or that his traps look like he’s carrying a hang glider on his back.
as far as the training goes, I think it exceedingly likely that if he were to be at his peak today, he’d be making use of: squat racks/power cages, protein powder, creatine, etc and probably a split a la Yates (I’m just making a guess on the last one, but I think it’s pretty likely.)
Also, he’d have probably squeezed a few more pounds onto his frame (no matter what his Butt Limit) & would come in a bit drier.
While impressive for his era, he wouldn’t win too many contests today (if any at all) in that condition. His upper chest is lagging along with front delts, medial delts and legs. He is also way too smooth for contests today at the professional level.
There is no doubt that if he were just starting today that his efforts would have been to more balanced according to our current standards as well as be more dried out.
That is why looking at these guys as if this is all they could achieve is ridiculous. t was a different era and they were legit FREAKS of that time period. No one thought men could look like that before they did…just like people who follow Butt’s bullshit believe no one today can reach much above 200lbs without a steroid IV drip.[/quote]
I’m definitely in agreement with you and Bill here. I’m just trying to add support to the argument that training methods have evolved across the board, and that to think that the “Impressive Guys of Yesteryear” (I am absolutely impressed by most of them, but think they have been surpassed by today’s elite) wouldn’t use every modern advantage to excel is dumb.
This part is just my opinion → If I want a physique as similar to/good as Mr. Park as I can achieve, operating on the assumption that I have bodybuilding genetics that are inferior to his, and that I’m not trying to make a career of it, I better have as much of the rest of things locked down as possible. Also opinion → MOST of the people trying to model physical success like his, by following his routine are doing it on the assumption that if they do the same lifts/reps/schedule, they’ll look just like him (or Brad Pitt or Wolverine, et al), OR they’re just hardgainers, and women really prefer Tobey Maguires ;')
Well, I’m off to shoot some Rhino Growth Hormone into my arse, so I can maintain weight.
Edited for clarity.
[quote]ckallander wrote:
In fact, I actually totally agree with you on this thread up until you dicked me in ass… so good.
[/quote]
Dude, I thought we were going to keep that between us.
Oops.