[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Isn’t there a saying about keeping doing the same thing but expecting different results?
[/quote]
Indeed…insanity.
[quote]m1sf1t wrote:
What a waste of fucking time!
Dude, if you are not a troll, you are retarded and a total beginner at BEST. What determines your training longevity is what you have achieved with your time and what you’ve learned from it, obviously not very much in your case. Your lack of results has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with a training philosophy, but for you being a pussy at the gym and in the kitchen.
You didn’t train legs before and now, you’re doing compound movements three or four times per week and have no results?? You need to step away from the pink dumbbell section then. Any beginner will grow, almost REGARDLESS of what program they’re following, if they put enough effort into it.
If you are a troll, you are still retarded and need to get a life instead of trying to stir shit up that you don’t even understand…
JonBlood wrote:
Here are the pictures that were requested because apparently im a troll…whatever that means.
[/quote]
Misfit is truly hardcore; I mean it’s truly hardcore and called for and respectable to talk derisively and dismissively and disrespectfully a kid trying to get his shit together!
Pussy!
[quote]JonBlood wrote:
Here are the pictures that were requested because apparently im a troll…whatever that means.[/quote]
Dude, you’re NOT a troll.
You are serious and dedicated and are simply asking for guidance.
Thanks for all of the positive feedback. HSS100 actually looks pretty good. Has anyone tried that out yet?
Also, the people who come on here and waste their time calling me a troll need to get a life and grow a sack.
Does anyone care to post their current training routines?
I am on my second week of this program and am really enjoying it. I really did not like doing flat incline decline flies preacher hammers BB curls etc. The TBT, although some of you say won’t get me huge is definitely more fun!
Barbell Back Squats
Sets: 10
Reps: 3
Rest: 70 seconds
A1 Dips
A2 Bent-Over Barbell or Dumbbell Rows
Sets: 4
Reps: 6
Rest: 60 seconds (between exercise pairings)
Note: A1/A2 consists of a superset pairing
B1 Skull Crushers
B2 Standing Barbell Curls
Sets: 4
Reps: 6
Rest: 60 seconds
Hanging Leg Raises
Sets: 4
Reps: 6
Rest: 60 seconds between sets
DAY 2
15-20 minutes of medium intensity jogging or GPP work
DAY 3
Barbell or Dumbbell Bench Press
Sets: 10
Reps: 3
Rest: 60 seconds between sets
A1 Partial Dumbbell Deadlift (Romanian Deadlift)
A2 Standing Barbell Military Press
Sets: 4
Reps: 6
Rest: 60 seconds (between pairings)
B1 Standing Calf Raises
B2 Upright Rows
Sets: 4
Reps: 6
Rest: 60 seconds (between pairings)
Triceps Pressdowns (or French Presses)
Sets: 4
Reps: 6
Rest: 60 seconds (between sets)
DAY 4
Same as Day 2
DAY 5
Chin-ups
Sets: 10
Reps: 3
Rest: 70 seconds (between sets)
Note: Utilize a supinated (palms up), shoulder-width hand grip
A1 Decline Barbell or Dumbbell Bench Press
A2 Standing Hammer Curls
Sets: 4
Reps: 6
Rest: 60 seconds (between pairings)
B1 Seated Calf Raises
B2 Glute/Ham Raises or Leg Curls
Sets: 4
Reps: 6
Rest: 60 seconds (between pairings)
Lunges or Step-Ups
Sets: 4
Reps: 6
Rest: 60 seconds (between sets)
Note: No rest between legs
DAY 6
Same as Day 2
DAY 7
Off
[quote]LiveFromThe781 wrote:
Clifford wrote:
a PX vs Waterbury debate article about split training vs total body training for hypertrophy would no doubt be one of the most controversial “in your face” articles ever. and probably get more discussion then any article i have ever read.
heres the article…
PX: eat food, use a split, stop being a pussy, if you get too fat add cardio or drop some cals
CW: lots of scientific words, studies, Biotest plug, hopscotch with a weighted vest[/quote]
so your saying you wouldn’t read the article? i find that a little hard to believe. i guarantee neither of them will convince the other their wrong but people would read it just to watch them bash each other.i get the hunch from reading some of their past posts this wouldn’t be your friendly neighborhood debate. humans love drama and that’s why i think it would be a fun article to read. do you disagree?
I’ve done isolated HSS-100 DAYS before, for a change-up, but I’ve not done the entire routine. Several of my former training partners did for quite a while, and they all put on size and strength. I believe the guy who got the best results from it put on 20 lbs while maintaining bodyfat levels ( approximately). He wasn’t afraid to eat though.
My current routine won’t help you probably, but here’s the abbreviated version
Mon–ME Legs
Tues–Back
Wed–ME bench/lockout
Thurs–OFF
Fri—rep squat/speed legs
Sat/Sun–rep bench/full ROM bench
Aside from my back day, additional lat/back work is done on bench days, as energy levels dictate (usually rep day or rep squat day)
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
JonBlood wrote:
Here are the pictures that were requested because apparently im a troll…whatever that means.
Dude, you’re NOT a troll.
You are serious and dedicated and are simply asking for guidance. [/quote]
What happened to that other avatar-pic of yours, brick?
That fit in so much better with your comments 
[quote]JonBlood wrote:
I have been following Chad’s programs now for almost eight months. I really do trust the guy but his programs haven’t done much for me regarding hypertrophy. Also, because his programs all differ greatly in set/rep parameters, I believe that you are not given enough time to actually get stronger and/or bigger.
Also, many of the bodybuilders still do a lot of splits and isolation work, whereas Chad and a number of other trainers firmly believe in total body training only.
I just wanted to know what you guys all thought of his programs, if you have trained under his "guidance" and if you had any recommendations.
Thanks
Oh yeah…What do you think of replacing all of your protein shakes with egg whites?[/quote]
My opinion of Chad Waterbury’s programs is that he fundamentally “doesn’t get it”, particularly from a hypertrophy standpoint. I am not the least bit surprised to hear about your lack of progress. You would have been better off reading Flex or M&F and taking the information there to heart. Yes, I’m being serious.
Since I strongly disagree with CW’s underlying premises, I cannot endorse any of his programs.
I believe he is the classic example of the “performance guy” who thinks that everything which athletes and weightlifters do can be applied to bodybuilders with comparable results. He doesn’t recognize the validity of time-tested hypertrophy concepts, such as TUT, the pump, isolation, and volume.
His favorite concepts are training frequency and bar speed, both of which come from the realm of Olympic Lifting.
Chad is a one-dimensional coach but so are the vast majority in this industry. Very, very few people are capable of speaking with any authority about “both sides of the fence” (that is, strength/performance as well as aesthetics/bodybuilding). Among them I would include Dave Tate, guys like Justin Harris who compete in bodybuilding but come from a strength background, myself, and very few others. Tate’s example is probably the most impressive, since he is a long-time powerlifter who has demonstrated advanced knowledge of concepts that are antithetical to his chosen sport. When a heavyweight powerlifter can seriously endorse the concept of the pump as a hypertrophy aid, you know you are dealing with one very open-minded (and likely well educated) individual. Dave Tate is such a person.
Arguably, Charles Poliquin can speak to both sides as well, although he has an admitted bias towards the strength and performance crowd.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
JonBlood wrote:
I have been following Chad’s programs now for almost eight months. I really do trust the guy but his programs haven’t done much for me regarding hypertrophy. Also, because his programs all differ greatly in set/rep parameters, I believe that you are not given enough time to actually get stronger and/or bigger.
Also, many of the bodybuilders still do a lot of splits and isolation work, whereas Chad and a number of other trainers firmly believe in total body training only.
I just wanted to know what you guys all thought of his programs, if you have trained under his "guidance" and if you had any recommendations.
Thanks
Oh yeah…What do you think of replacing all of your protein shakes with egg whites?
My opinion of Chad Waterbury’s programs is that he fundamentally “doesn’t get it”, particularly from a hypertrophy standpoint. I am not the least bit surprised to hear about your lack of progress. You would have been better off reading Flex or M&F and taking the information there to heart. Yes, I’m being serious.
Since I strongly disagree with CW’s underlying premises, I cannot endorse any of his programs.
I believe he is the classic example of the “performance guy” who thinks that everything which athletes and weightlifters do can be applied to bodybuilders with comparable results. He doesn’t recognize the validity of time-tested hypertrophy concepts, such as TUT, the pump, isolation, and volume.
His favorite concepts are training frequency and bar speed, both of which come from the realm of Olympic Lifting.
Chad is a one-dimensional coach but so are the vast majority in this industry. Very, very few people are capable of speaking with any authority about “both sides of the fence” (that is, strength/performance as well as aesthetics/bodybuilding). Among them I would include Dave Tate, guys like Justin Harris who compete in bodybuilding but come from a strength background, myself, and very few others. Tate’s example is probably the most impressive, since he is a long-time powerlifter who has demonstrated advanced knowledge of concepts that are antithetical to his chosen sport. When a heavyweight powerlifter can seriously endorse the concept of the pump as a hypertrophy aid, you know you are dealing with one very open-minded (and likely well educated) individual. Dave Tate is such a person.
Arguably, Charles Poliquin can speak to both sides as well, although he has an admitted bias towards the strength and performance crowd. [/quote]
Since just about everyone on this forum strongly disagrees with CW’s theories, then I definitely need to start looking for a new program. I looked through Dave Tates articles here on T-Nation, and although that are very informative, there were no clear-cut training programs that I could follow. I could devise my own program from his ideas, but I do not think that I am experienced enough to do so.
What do you think of the following:
Monday
Chest/Bi’s
Flat, Incline and Decline bench 3x10
Preacher, dumbell and barbell curls 3x10
Tuesday
Cardio
Wed
Back/Tris
Pullups, chinups and rows 3x10
Dips, pushdowns and close grip bench 3x10
Thurs
Cardio
Friday
Squat, Deadlift and calf raises 3x10
Military press, front and side raises, upright rows 3x10
I believe that would be a huge change from my current CW program
I still think you would be doing too many compounds and not enough isolation work in that routine.
I know you have been conditioned to think otherwise, but heavy, free weight compound exercises simply do not build lots of muscle. Small, targetted exercises do.
My advice to you is to do what the pro’s do. In this case, pro bodybuilders.
I would not search for Dave Tate because the majority of the stuff you’ll run across will be geared towards strength athletes. If you don’t know what pro BB’ers are doing then I suggest you get a subscription to Flex magazine or keep searching the net. There are plenty of resources.
This site has traditionally been geared towards the strength crowd and has only begun transitioning away from that perspective in the last year or so.
For the hell of it, trying going on an all-isolation, machine split for a couple weeks.
See what happens.
You might be surprised.
JonBlood, keep in mind that unlike yourself, NominalProspect is a troll.
He is saying the above just because he likes to generate debates in which he will act very intellectual, in his own mind, while in fact completely ignoring everything that is said. A waste of time.
Chad seems to be the least of your problems!
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
JonBlood, keep in mind that unlike yourself, NominalProspect is a troll.
He is saying the above just because he likes to generate debates in which he will act very intellectual, in his own mind, while in fact completely ignoring everything that is said. A waste of time.[/quote]
Haha that’s really funny. Apparently there are a lot of damn trolls on these boards.
Although, I am interested in trying the isolation work he speaks of because it is something new. But I don’t understand what an all isolation routine would be - I thought that was the example I wrote a few posts prior.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
mom-in-MD wrote:
LankyMofo wrote:
JonBlood wrote:
… and the addition of the creatine I ordered last night.
Gentlemen, you are currently being trolled. Just re-read how his posts are put together and you’ll see.
dang…so I wasted my time trying to sound all smart and stuff? dude.
I get the feeling any of us who do make significant progress are wasting our time.[/quote]
Haha, that could be the title of a new forum methinks.
[quote]JonBlood wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
JonBlood, keep in mind that unlike yourself, NominalProspect is a troll.
He is saying the above just because he likes to generate debates in which he will act very intellectual, in his own mind, while in fact completely ignoring everything that is said. A waste of time.
Haha that’s really funny. Apparently there are a lot of damn trolls on these boards.
Although, I am interested in trying the isolation work he speaks of because it is something new. But I don’t understand what an all isolation routine would be - I thought that was the example I wrote a few posts prior.[/quote]
All-isolation would mean no movements where more than one joint changes angle at a time, but rather only one joint.
So no squats, leg presses, bench presses, pullups, rows, overhead presses, etc., but rather only exercises like leg extensions, leg curls, the pec deck machine, lateral raises, etc.
[quote]JonBlood wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
JonBlood, keep in mind that unlike yourself, NominalProspect is a troll.
He is saying the above just because he likes to generate debates in which he will act very intellectual, in his own mind, while in fact completely ignoring everything that is said. A waste of time.
Haha that’s really funny. Apparently there are a lot of damn trolls on these boards.
Although, I am interested in trying the isolation work he speaks of because it is something new. But I don’t understand what an all isolation routine would be - I thought that was the example I wrote a few posts prior.[/quote]
An isolation exercise involves movement at only one joint. Arm curls, Lateral Raises, Tricep Extensions, Leg Extensions, etc…
Nearly every exercise you posted was a compound exercise because it involves movement at multiple joints.
Since different muscle groups have different performance thresholds and achieve overload at different parts of the strength-tension curve, it is nearly impossible to use multi-joint movements to achieve muscular overload, which is the necessary precursor of muscular hypertrophy.
The inherent flaw of all compound exercises from a bodybuilding perspective is that you are limited by the “weakest link” in the chain of muscles that is used to perform the exercise. In this way, you simply cannot achieve overload for the other muscle groups. At best, you will be training your “weakest link” and nothing more. Over time, this develops huge “physique holes” and imbalances which have to be corrected with proper training: i.e. isolation movements. If you run a search across strength forums you will find plenty of threads about this issue. You will also find other people who have tried doing compounds and not gotten anything in the way of mass gains. Your case is not particularly unique, which should be reassuring, since you haven’t been doing anything wrong, outside of choosing the wrong exercises.
The types of people who can gain appreciable amounts of muscle from compounds were “built” for doing them in the first place. You can usually tell this just by looking at them.
Some people on this forum are paranoid and don’t like to think very much. They are fond of lumping others into pre-conceived categories such as “troll”, so that they won’t have to bother with addressing their claims.
It’s true that I’m frequently accused of being a troll. I happen to think it’s a very stupid label. When I read posts made by others I am chiefly concerned about ascertaining the truth within their statements, not their inner motivations for making them.
A silly person who makes foolish claims ought to have those claims refuted. To attack his underlying motivations is a round-about way of going about it which I find rather useless. One can demonstrate the validity or falsity of an argument readily enough, but it’s nearly impossible to determine someone else’s motivation for making that argument. Particularly so, in an online forum.
If you read the following post you’ll see that my claims are often later validated by respected authorities:
I exhibit characteristics in my posting style that are completely alien to those of known “trolls”.
Most notably, I routinely advocate my views from a defensive position, whereas said “trolls” are known for employing strategic timing to get points across before serious opposition to them can be mustered. When the cavalry arrives, they are already long gone. On the other hand, read any thread I’ve ever made and you’ll see that I am like Hercules, fighting my way single-handedly through legions of monstrosities.
On the internet, he who controls the flow of information rules the battlefield. Consequently, a person wishing to “fool” a message board will be secretive and rarely reveal anything about himself. Such posters do not take questions from all comers, if at all. In fact, they often will not respond directly to any other poster. It’s quite easy to spot when you see it in action.
I’m the exact opposite. I’m very open and honest, as I’m sure you can tell just by reading this post.
I exhibit all the characteristics of an outspoken iconoclast and none of the characteristics of a willful manipulator.
“Trolls” are often well liked, up to a point. I’m not well liked at all. So there you have it. I’m no a troll.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
JonBlood wrote:
An isolation exercise involves movement at only one joint. Arm curls, Lateral Raises, Tricep Extensions, Leg Extensions, etc…
Nearly every exercise you posted was a compound exercise because it involves movement at multiple joints.
[/quote]
So what would I do for my Chest and back?
You know, I’d sure like to see a pic of Waterbury’s physique. All the pictures I know of are pretty unrevealing.
What do you mean man?!?!? Hes got a huge forehead!