Natural Bodybuilding as a Teen Roadmap

Training
184

Another great post! Damn we’re lucky you decided to venture into the bodybuilding sub forum after a few years of sporadically being on the site and grace us with your extensive knowledge and experience :wink:

Seriously man, for someone who professes to only care about what’s correct or not in discussions like this, I’m not the one who seems to have my panties in a bunch.

I get it though, I’ve seen plenty of people all excited as they post their opinion, truly thinking they’ve finally made an awesome contribution to a thread after years of lurking on a site, but then have pretty much everyone else who has a grasp on the material disagree with them. It can be pretty disheartening. So they’re left with either trying to backpedal a bit depending on the actual topic, or doubling down and trying to justify what they said with requests for specific data (even though we all know tests on actual Bodybuilders aren’t the norm), or puffing up their chests and trying to show their experience and personal results (pics or often unverifiable tales of accomplishments).

How about you just take a breath, grab some decaf, and engage in a discussion without taking everything so personally?

S

1 Like
185

Hey Stu, what’s the piece of cake next to your username represent?

1 Like
186

I have no idea, just saw that myself. I wonder what other foods might appear up there. I’m certainly partial to PooTarts if there’s a emoticon for one :slight_smile:

S

1 Like
187

Pootart? I’m not sure I like the sound of those

1 Like
188

Lol - what I get typing on my little cel phone with these Twinkie fingers of mine.

S

189

Stu I’ll eat whatever you tell me on my prep, but I’m a little hesitant about these pootarts…

3 Likes
190

Pfft. And you call yourself a BBer…

2 Likes
191

So much for Rob’s self proclaimed hardcore mentality -lol

S

3 Likes
192

I make my own programs, and I think at a certain point it’s best for most people to do so. Nevertheless, if it seems to me it’s better than my own, then I would use it, regardless of who else does and does not support it, unless their argument for not using it is better than the argument for using it.

193

There you go projecting, again. I still have no idea what you even disagree with me on. Your only complaints ITT have been on increasingly petty things, and in an increasingly passive-aggressive way. You should consider getting your hormones checked.

194

I just saw this article on the frontpage [Here], and I’m curious how ardently you guys would disagree with me after seeing I’m saying the same basic thing as CT.

Notice the similarities, he also says the optimal frequency with which a natty should stimulate any given muscle group is 3x/week, not once every 5-7 days.

He calls this a low-volume program, but that’s really only true on any given day, and only relative to enhanced lifters. It’s a 6-day program, so week-to-week, this is quite a bit of volume. In fact the way most of these lifts are set up, you’re doing about 2x as much volume on any given lift as you could on any single AMRAP set, which is what I would define as high-volume. I’m sure none of you picked up on this, but that’s the same amount my program to OP has built into it.

Now I know some of you are going to see the word “split” in this article and think, “aha! you see? splits are best!” but this isn’t a low-frequency upper/lower split. This is a push/pull split, where you’re covering your full body every session, just with the emphasis on different muscle groups (wowzers, kinda like my program here). This is still more specialized than the program I made, but it’s also split up over 6 days and not 3, so in order to hit every muscle group 3x/week, it has to be.

In fact as far as I can tell there’s only 2 meaningful differences between the program I use for myself and this program, which is;

  1. This program is split over 6 days instead of 3, but it’s roughly the same total work per week (depending on assistance work)

  2. CT specifies the assistance work you’ll be doing. I don’t plan my assistance lifts in advance because I prefer to autoregulate that shit and base what my assistance work is on what felt like it needed more work on that day. This has me doing different assistant work most sessions, which coincidentally is literally what CT says you should do in his article.

So if anyone is curious, this is the sort of split I would personally be willing to do. I won’t actually be doing it, though, for 2 reasons.

  1. I prefer to keep my main lifts static (always squat/bench/deadlift/press) and undulate the periodization daily instead of switching up my main lifts. This is only because these are my competitive lifts, though. This isn’t a disagreement in principle.

  2. I can’t manage 6 sessions per week, so I have to up the per-session volume and keep everything contained to 3 sessions per week. Again, this isn’t a disagreement in principle. In fact I said earlier in this thread I think advanced lifters (up until they hit their genetic limits) should use even more frequency, since their growth window might be as short as 12 hours (compared to the typical 24-36).

Now, if you’re training for physique, a lot of this isn’t necessary, because you don’t need so much glute/quad/hamstring work, but for general natties looking to build muscle in the optimal way possible, these are the principles you’ll want to train by.

1 Like
195

I beleieve this is the root of the disconnect. I will say it is very brave of you to trust your progress to an unproven program. I find most folks simply don’t see a need to be a pioneer when it comes to their free time and effort.

I am the total opposite. If something works, and it violates all the science in the world, I will still do it.

3 Likes
196

Building as much mass as possible isn’t necessarily the same thing as sculpting a physique. We are in a bodybuilding forum where we are talking about building a physique rather than simply acquiring mass as quickly as possible. That is the key factor you continue to ignore whenever we post it.

Nobody is declaring your method to be stupid, to be a method that doesn’t generate results. It will generate results, it will add mass to your body. Simply put, when you get to a certain point in your training, you don’t need to hit every muscle group that often because not every muscle group needs to BUILD. Some need to maintain, some need to decrease slightly, and others need to grow. This is how one sculpts a pleasing, proportionate physique.

Also, why are you so hell-bent on the conclusion that a physique athlete/bodybuilder doesn’t need to work legs?

1 Like
197

I’m not ignoring this factor. I went over this over and over again earlier in this thread. For most noobs, the best option is to prioritize building as much muscle as they can in the optimal way they can because they don’t know which discipline their genes are best for, or what their weaknesses are, as everything is a weakness. You can’t begin sculpting your physique if you don’t know which points you’ll have to prioritize and which points you’ll get just by being genetically blessed in that area.

Simply put, when you get to a certain point in your training, you don’t need to hit every muscle group that often because not every muscle group needs to BUILD.

I’ve said this almost verbatim multiple times earlier in this thread, too.

I never said physique guys don’t need t train their legs, but obviously they don’t need to prioritize or emphasize them as much as lifters in other disciplines because they don’t showcase these muscles in competition.

198

So if most of us have conceded that the plan you advocate for “noobs” is the right course of action, and you have conceded that the split routine that we advocate for intermediate and advanced lifters is good, why the hell are you still arguing about it? If we all agree, can we just leave it alone? Sheesh. Let it go, man.

2 Likes
199

You have this backwards. I never came to any of you, you all came to me. If you don’t want to argue with me, don’t. I’m not going after any of you, and I haven’t responded to anyone who didn’t first take issue with me. There’s nothing for me to let go, because I’m not holding on to any of you.

Also, this isn’t about split routines vs full body routines as though they exist in a vacuum. The disagreement people are taking with me, to the extent any of you even have a coherent disagreement with me, is in their application, and the nature of hypertrophy.

Just so it’s all in one place, this is my position in a nutshell:

A split program is fine for anyone looking to maximize muscle growth under the conditions that it is high-frequency, hits every major muscle group 3x/week (or more, depending on overlap and per-session volume), hits large muscle groups in both the upper and lower body every session, has a moderate intensity in the 65-85% range (preferably 70-80, IMO), and has adequate volume, which I define as a set/rep scheme resulting in a greater number of reps at a given intensity than is possible in any one set (say, 1.5x-2x, depending on frequency and intensity).

You can manage this in a split if it’s like CT’s above which has you lifting 6x/week. For people who are beginners or people who don’t have time for that, a full body program 3x/week like the one I posted originally would work better, because it’s easier to schedule and most beginners will be in a state of heightened muscle-protein synthesis for 24-36 hours after lifting anyway (maybe longer).
The more advanced you get, the more frequency you’ll need to make optimal gains, as your body will be in a heightened state of muscle-protein synthesis for a shorter and shorter period of time (down to as low as 12 hours or so). Once you reach your genetic limit, you can slash the volume and frequency tremendously and focus even more primarily on your weak points, since you won’t be packing on much size no matter what you do, anyway.

If anyone takes issue with any part of this, then we have something to argue about. If you don’t, then we don’t.

200

An older author I used to really like, Ian King, subscribes to a continuum in which the volume goes down as the lifter advances in training age. How would you balance the higher frequency with the lower volume requirements, if you abide by that concept?

Also, how do you rectify the increased frequency with recovery ability to achieve the desired training effect of a given high frequency training template?

201

Fucking great thread. When you get @robstein pissed off and cursing, you know someone has reached a new low.

I’m gonna go have a Poo Tart and go to bed, can’t wait to see what new prima facie funkiness shows up in the morning.

2 Likes
202

Bill pearl always maintained in his writing that the more advanced you get, the more your system can tolerate and see results from. As i progressed and improved I found myself going from tryin by to be dorian Yates to trying to be jay cutler. Volume became my friend and I found the real magic to progress was more with nutrition and exercise performance than seekin out a magic formula of training frequency and recovery.

That doesn’t sell training articles though.

S

3 Likes
203

Amazingly I found that my iPhone autocorrected that a few times today. Now I’m worried about what I may have been eating.

S