Total Body Training - How Do You Fit Everything In?

[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:
I like the business analogy, because it helps illustrate Waittz’s point, too, I believe.

Let’s say you make your own beer, and it’s pretty good/popular with your friends and neighbors. You go to a consultant to ask how to turn that into a small business. I 100% guarantee you that consultant will not tell you to structure your business like Coors, Bud, etc. You actually have more in common with other small businesses in the food/beverage industry (possibly even other industries) than you do with the behemoth beer manufacturers.

Why? Because you aren’t on their level. Those companies didn’t start doing business the way they are doing it now. They grew, developed, advanced and changed. They had an IPO, hired a board of directors, a CEO, etc. to meet new demands.

Similarly, you don’t start with the end in lifting weights. Yes, I agree that the vast majority of top level guys do splits, but it doesn’t follow that you should necessarily emulate that behavior to get where they are. Is there a lot to learn from those guys? Absolutely, just as a small beer start-up could still learn a lot from Bud, but that doesn’t mean that the start-up should emulate every aspect of the successful giant.

Compare powerlifting to bodybuilding. In the relative world of sports, they are very similar. What do top level powerlifters do to train for their meets? Crazy shit like Smolov, Westside, Sheiko, Bulgarian Wave Training, and very manner of periodization you can think of. If I am a novice or even intermediate powerlifter, does it necessarily follow that I should emulate the top guys? I’m confident most in the know would say “no.” They would recommend progressive overload, or something very simple like 5/3/1, because less advanced trainees don’t need to engage in the same training as pros in order to progress.

To my mind it’s no different in bodybuilding. The advanced and professionals may have discovered that body-part splits are the best programming for them, but that doesn’t mean somebody well below their level couldn’t progress just as easily on TBT.[/quote]

Fair counter point.

Ok, I agree, one should look at how successful people got to be successful, not necessarily what they do once they are already successful to stay successful (even though there is usually quite a bit of overlap there).

So, where are all of the successful BB’ers saying that beginners or intermediates should avoid splits and do TBT instead? In mean, if your assertion is that these people got successful using TBT and then only switched to splits once they were already accomplished BB’ers, then you’d expect them to be singing the praises of TBT for beginning BB’ers. Yet, strangely enough, the vast majority of them (in fact all of them that I have read) recommend splits to beginners. Sure, sometimes they’ll recommend different types of splits (like Upper/Lower, Push/Pull, etc…), but splits nonetheless.

Even among the Authors who contribute to this site, pretty much all of the Bodybuilders or former BB’ers (JM, Dr Clay Hyght, CT, Shelby Starnes, Scott Abel, etc…) advocate splits. Coincidence, or just a not so subtle bread crumb on the path of success?

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I’m not advocating either way, but didn’t Arthur Jones advocate TBT (at least his versions) and didn’t he turn out at least a few examples? [/quote]

Yes, technically HIT could be categorized as TBT, and yes, Jones trained some successful BB’ers in his time and inspired others (including Mentzer and Yates, though Yates never did a classic HIT or TBT program) to follow his lead.

That is a very different form of TBT than what most authors promoting TBT for bodybuilding are writing about though. But good catch.

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:
I like the business analogy, because it helps illustrate Waittz’s point, too, I believe.

Let’s say you make your own beer, and it’s pretty good/popular with your friends and neighbors. You go to a consultant to ask how to turn that into a small business. I 100% guarantee you that consultant will not tell you to structure your business like Coors, Bud, etc. You actually have more in common with other small businesses in the food/beverage industry (possibly even other industries) than you do with the behemoth beer manufacturers.

Why? Because you aren’t on their level. Those companies didn’t start doing business the way they are doing it now. They grew, developed, advanced and changed. They had an IPO, hired a board of directors, a CEO, etc. to meet new demands.

Similarly, you don’t start with the end in lifting weights. Yes, I agree that the vast majority of top level guys do splits, but it doesn’t follow that you should necessarily emulate that behavior to get where they are. Is there a lot to learn from those guys? Absolutely, just as a small beer start-up could still learn a lot from Bud, but that doesn’t mean that the start-up should emulate every aspect of the successful giant.

Compare powerlifting to bodybuilding. In the relative world of sports, they are very similar. What do top level powerlifters do to train for their meets? Crazy shit like Smolov, Westside, Sheiko, Bulgarian Wave Training, and very manner of periodization you can think of. If I am a novice or even intermediate powerlifter, does it necessarily follow that I should emulate the top guys? I’m confident most in the know would say “no.” They would recommend progressive overload, or something very simple like 5/3/1, because less advanced trainees don’t need to engage in the same training as pros in order to progress.

To my mind it’s no different in bodybuilding. The advanced and professionals may have discovered that body-part splits are the best programming for them, but that doesn’t mean somebody well below their level couldn’t progress just as easily on TBT.[/quote]

Fair counter point.

Ok, I agree, one should look at how successful people got to be successful, not necessarily what they do once they are already successful to stay successful (even though there is usually quite a bit of overlap there).

So, where are all of the successful BB’ers saying that beginners or intermediates should avoid splits and do TBT instead? In mean, if your assertion is that these people got successful using TBT and then only switched to splits once they were already accomplished BB’ers, then you’d expect them to be singing the praises of TBT for beginning BB’ers. Yet, strangely enough, the vast majority of them (in fact all of them that I have read) recommend splits to beginners. Sure, sometimes they’ll recommend different types of splits (like Upper/Lower, Push/Pull, etc…), but splits nonetheless.

Even among the Authors who contribute to this site, pretty much all of the Bodybuilders or former BB’ers (JM, Dr Clay Hyght, CT, Shelby Starnes, Scott Abel, etc…) advocate splits. Coincidence, or just a not so subtle bread crumb on the path of success?[/quote]

Maybe I am wrong here but I think the disconnect is that you are looking in terms of absolute for competitive bodybuilding only in your examples. Not building muscle in general, or buidling foundation, balance between strenght/size, or anything not refering to the end product of on stage.

There are tons of authors(um…CT included, look at his background and older stuff) that do advocate it, again none using the absolute end goal of onstage bodybuilding, some of them just dont post anymore. Dan John, Waterbury, Cosgrove, King, even Dave Draper used and advocated a fullbody split in his book. Moral of the story is different strokes for different folks.

Also, aside from my one little joke where I still basically said if you want to look like a bodybuilder or compete onstage TBT is not for you, I am really confused why you think me advocating TBT as a superior way to grow muscle for newbs and a great tool to use 3 or so months of the year(look at my earlier posts) means that I am discrediting body part splits? I mean just look at my very first post here.

Sidenote, I also think you, and the masses, generally downplay the role of drugs in the success of high level bodybuilding and bodypart splits. Some of the authors I mentioned(Cosgrove is one I remember) has gone on at lenghts, on this site no less, that the majority of the trainers advocating splits, if having to train a baseline newb, would no doubt have them do TBT first.

[quote]Vanch wrote:

The reason I’ve thought about switching to a 3 day full body workout, as opposed to my usual 5 day bodypart split is due to a number of reasons. My current 5 day split looks like this:

Mon - Chest
Tue - Back
Wed - Shoulders
Thu - Legs
Fri - Biceps/Triceps

I’ve been training using this routine for a long time now, although I was getting worried about overtraining. Using this routine, my triceps get trained 3 times per week (indirectly on Mon/Wed, and directly on Friday), my biceps get trained twice and my forearms are being used pretty much every workout, even on leg day due to Stiff Leg Deadlifts. My arm growth in comparison to the rest of my body seems like it’s lagging behind, and I fear that my 5 day split could be causing overtraining.

[/quote]

Over training isn’t localized, it’s systemic. If you’re growing at all you can’t possibly be over trained. Please post your split in more detail.

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

[quote]Waittz wrote:

[quote]giograves wrote:

[quote]Waittz wrote:
I would just like to add that using top level pros(aka the genetic elite) to prove or disprove a training method isn’t fair, these guys would be pretty successful regardless how they trained. That being said, I have a sneaking suspicion there would be a lot less DYELers out there who have trained for over a year(on this site as well) if they stopped trying to train like the top level guys and just put a fucking barbell on their back and squatted it, pulled it off the ground, pressed it off their chest, rowed it to their chest, and pressed it over there head 5 times for 5 sets 3 times a week for a good 6 months. […]
[/quote]

Wise words.

Just about all the skinny dudes coming to me asking for advice almost always make amazing improvements when I tell them drop the bro-split and some of the volume and focus on getting stronger. Train like a BBer when you are a BBer.[/quote]

Or never train like a BBer… unless you take drugs, or are actually going to do a competition…even then…maybe I should have saved that for the ‘flame free’ thread lol. [/quote]

That is such a silly comment I don’t even know where to begin.

It seems to have become popular lately (at least among people on Internet forums, all the big muscular guys I know in person don’t seem to feel the same way) that Bodybuilding is the one sport/activity where all of the really accomplished people are doing this wrong and others seeking success should not follow their lead or try to learn from their (the successful athletes) experiences.

Would you tell an aspiring Football player, “definitely don’t train like the pro football guys do, they are the genetic elite and some use PED’s.” Or tell an aspiring Powerlifter not to train like the top Powerlifters? Heck, name one other sport or physical activity where you would tell up and coming athletes that the best athletes in that sport (who are just as likely to be the genetic elite as BB’ers) are training wrong/sub optimally and instead the up and comers to train how those athletes trained 60-70 years ago (or never trained).

If you want to be a Bodybuilder, train like the best Bodybuilders do. If you want to be a Powerlifter, train like the top Powerlifters do. If you want to be a MMA fighter, Baseball player, Gymnast, Rock Climber, Crossfit athlete, or reach a high level in any sport or physical activity, look at how the top people in the sport currently train and train like that.[/quote]

what the best are currently doing could be very different from what they did in the beginning… telling someone to simply train like the best is not good advice. yes you can adopt some concepts from the pros, but to say look at how they train and train like that is stupid considering 99% of people are nowhere near advanced enough to worry about training like a fucking pro bodybuilder…[/quote]

Your first sentence is a valid point, but with today’s wealth of information and access to the Pros (both Natural and Assisted), it’s pretty easy to find out what they did to reach their level. And honestly, many of them (especially the natural guys) advise training like they currently do, or have actually been doing some sort of variation of what they are currently doing right from the start. I don’t know why you assume that their current training regime wouldn’t work for a beginner or intermediate.

For instance we know exactly how Dorian Yates, Skip Lacour, and Jeff Willet trained right from the get go, which were split routines. All of them reached the pinnacles of their sport (Dorian was a multiple time Mr Olympia while Skip and Jeff won the most prestigious competition in the NPC’s “natural”/tested division). We know that Jim Cordova advises and actually trains total newbies using a split routine and he has won the World Natural Bodybuilding Association’s (WNBA) highest title (World Champion), as well as also winning the WNBF Pro Mr Universe and Pro Mr America title multiples times each (in other world he is one of the most successful Natural Bodybuilders in the world in one of the most respected natural BB’ing organizations).

Might you be able to find some highly successful BB’ers who did TBT for a stint at the beginning of their BB’ing training career or did some at some point during their career? Sure, you might. But they all eventually switched to splits because splits are just more effective for BB’ing. Thus my assertion that if you want to be a successful bodybuilder, then you should train how successful BB’ers train still holds true.

I really don’t understand your objection to that statement. I’m not saying that everyone must train like that (if their goals are different), just people who’s goal is primarily to build a bodybuilding physique or actually compete as a Bodybuilder successfully. If those aren’t your goals, then obviously that statement wouldn’t apply to you.

[/quote]

dorain started on a fullbody THEN transitioned into a 2way. but i think we agree basically so ill leave it at that.

[quote]Waittz wrote:

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:
I like the business analogy, because it helps illustrate Waittz’s point, too, I believe.

Let’s say you make your own beer, and it’s pretty good/popular with your friends and neighbors. You go to a consultant to ask how to turn that into a small business. I 100% guarantee you that consultant will not tell you to structure your business like Coors, Bud, etc. You actually have more in common with other small businesses in the food/beverage industry (possibly even other industries) than you do with the behemoth beer manufacturers.

Why? Because you aren’t on their level. Those companies didn’t start doing business the way they are doing it now. They grew, developed, advanced and changed. They had an IPO, hired a board of directors, a CEO, etc. to meet new demands.

Similarly, you don’t start with the end in lifting weights. Yes, I agree that the vast majority of top level guys do splits, but it doesn’t follow that you should necessarily emulate that behavior to get where they are. Is there a lot to learn from those guys? Absolutely, just as a small beer start-up could still learn a lot from Bud, but that doesn’t mean that the start-up should emulate every aspect of the successful giant.

Compare powerlifting to bodybuilding. In the relative world of sports, they are very similar. What do top level powerlifters do to train for their meets? Crazy shit like Smolov, Westside, Sheiko, Bulgarian Wave Training, and very manner of periodization you can think of. If I am a novice or even intermediate powerlifter, does it necessarily follow that I should emulate the top guys? I’m confident most in the know would say “no.” They would recommend progressive overload, or something very simple like 5/3/1, because less advanced trainees don’t need to engage in the same training as pros in order to progress.

To my mind it’s no different in bodybuilding. The advanced and professionals may have discovered that body-part splits are the best programming for them, but that doesn’t mean somebody well below their level couldn’t progress just as easily on TBT.[/quote]

Fair counter point.

Ok, I agree, one should look at how successful people got to be successful, not necessarily what they do once they are already successful to stay successful (even though there is usually quite a bit of overlap there).

So, where are all of the successful BB’ers saying that beginners or intermediates should avoid splits and do TBT instead? In mean, if your assertion is that these people got successful using TBT and then only switched to splits once they were already accomplished BB’ers, then you’d expect them to be singing the praises of TBT for beginning BB’ers. Yet, strangely enough, the vast majority of them (in fact all of them that I have read) recommend splits to beginners. Sure, sometimes they’ll recommend different types of splits (like Upper/Lower, Push/Pull, etc…), but splits nonetheless.

Even among the Authors who contribute to this site, pretty much all of the Bodybuilders or former BB’ers (JM, Dr Clay Hyght, CT, Shelby Starnes, Scott Abel, etc…) advocate splits. Coincidence, or just a not so subtle bread crumb on the path of success?[/quote]

Maybe I am wrong here but I think the disconnect is that you are looking in terms of absolute for competitive bodybuilding only in your examples. Not building muscle in general, or buidling foundation, balance between strenght/size, or anything not refering to the end product of on stage.

There are tons of authors(um…CT included, look at his background and older stuff) that do advocate it, again none using the absolute end goal of onstage bodybuilding, some of them just dont post anymore. Dan John, Waterbury, Cosgrove, King, even Dave Draper used and advocated a fullbody split in his book. Moral of the story is different strokes for different folks.

Also, aside from my one little joke where I still basically said if you want to look like a bodybuilder or compete onstage TBT is not for you, I am really confused why you think me advocating TBT as a superior way to grow muscle for newbs and a great tool to use 3 or so months of the year(look at my earlier posts) means that I am discrediting body part splits? I mean just look at my very first post here.
[/quote]

Obviously lots of people come into Bodybuilding from different backgrounds (like CT and Sergio Oliva started out as Olympic Lifters), I’m not suggesting that people can’t make some progress training with full body. Also, if your assertion is simply that it can be a valid option for beginners, or to shock your body from time to time, then I do not object to your position. I still believe that if you know right from the get go that bodybuilding is your primary goal you are better off training with splits, but if you or someone else wanted to train with TBT for some reason as a beginner that would be your/their choice. I don’t really understand why you would do that, but it’s your body and you’ve got to find your own path.

I also missed the fact that you were joking with that comment you made; sometimes subtext is difficult to catch via text only. So, I apologize for taking that more seriously than you had intended it to be taken.

[quote]
Sidenote, I also think you, and the masses, generally downplay the role of drugs in the success of high level bodybuilding and bodypart splits. Some of the authors I mentioned(Cosgrove is one I remember) has gone on at lenghts, on this site no less, that the majority of the trainers advocating splits, if having to train a baseline newb, would no doubt have them do TBT first. [/quote]

Here is the thing, Cosgrove, Dan John, Waterbury, and King are not bodybuilding coaches, they are strength and conditioning coaches. None of them look like bodybuilders, have competed successfully in bodybuilding (to the best of my knowledge anyhow), or are known for producing successful bodybuilders. If someone was looking for a good strength and conditioning coach to improve sports performance, then those would all be good choices. Draper is really the only name you mentioned who I would consider to be a reputable source of bodybuilding information.

So again, nearly all of the successful bodybuilding coaches advocate splits, all of the strength and conditioning coaches who don’t look like bodybuilders themselves and don’t regularly train any successful bodybuilders advocate TBT (and some even try make themselves seem more credible by trying to discredit the successful ones by accusing them to all be juiced to the gills and therefore not appropriate for natural lifters) for bodybuilding, even going as far as suggesting that their way is better. Hmmm, well, I know who I’m going to listen to given that choice.

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I’m not advocating either way, but didn’t Arthur Jones advocate TBT (at least his versions) and didn’t he turn out at least a few examples? [/quote]

Yes, technically HIT could be categorized as TBT, and yes, Jones trained some successful BB’ers in his time and inspired others (including Mentzer and Yates, though Yates never did a classic HIT or TBT program) to follow his lead.

That is a very different form of TBT than what most authors promoting TBT for bodybuilding are writing about though. But good catch.[/quote]

I just remember reading HIT or whatever it was called and thinking that should counts.

Technically if we go by the books (NASM) complete newbs should be doing phase 1 stabilization exercises… push ups on stability balls and what not on those giant balls haha.

Nonetheless I think the whole “TBT” term is incorrect anyway. It should be called High Frequency Training or something since the main exercises for TBT vs splits are still the same anyway.

[quote]GeeWud wrote:
Technically if we go by the books (NASM) complete newbs should be doing phase 1 stabilization exercises… push ups on stability balls and what not on those giant balls haha.

Nonetheless I think the whole “TBT” term is incorrect anyway. It should be called High Frequency Training or something since the main exercises for TBT vs splits are still the same anyway.[/quote]

high frequency training can be done without training the entire body in one session. TBT really just refers to a workout or workout plan that had you hitting major muscle groups in the upper and lower body in the same session.

[quote]Waittz wrote:

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:
I like the business analogy, because it helps illustrate Waittz’s point, too, I believe.

Let’s say you make your own beer, and it’s pretty good/popular with your friends and neighbors. You go to a consultant to ask how to turn that into a small business. I 100% guarantee you that consultant will not tell you to structure your business like Coors, Bud, etc. You actually have more in common with other small businesses in the food/beverage industry (possibly even other industries) than you do with the behemoth beer manufacturers.

Why? Because you aren’t on their level. Those companies didn’t start doing business the way they are doing it now. They grew, developed, advanced and changed. They had an IPO, hired a board of directors, a CEO, etc. to meet new demands.

Similarly, you don’t start with the end in lifting weights. Yes, I agree that the vast majority of top level guys do splits, but it doesn’t follow that you should necessarily emulate that behavior to get where they are. Is there a lot to learn from those guys? Absolutely, just as a small beer start-up could still learn a lot from Bud, but that doesn’t mean that the start-up should emulate every aspect of the successful giant.

Compare powerlifting to bodybuilding. In the relative world of sports, they are very similar. What do top level powerlifters do to train for their meets? Crazy shit like Smolov, Westside, Sheiko, Bulgarian Wave Training, and very manner of periodization you can think of. If I am a novice or even intermediate powerlifter, does it necessarily follow that I should emulate the top guys? I’m confident most in the know would say “no.” They would recommend progressive overload, or something very simple like 5/3/1, because less advanced trainees don’t need to engage in the same training as pros in order to progress.

To my mind it’s no different in bodybuilding. The advanced and professionals may have discovered that body-part splits are the best programming for them, but that doesn’t mean somebody well below their level couldn’t progress just as easily on TBT.[/quote]

Fair counter point.

Ok, I agree, one should look at how successful people got to be successful, not necessarily what they do once they are already successful to stay successful (even though there is usually quite a bit of overlap there).

So, where are all of the successful BB’ers saying that beginners or intermediates should avoid splits and do TBT instead? In mean, if your assertion is that these people got successful using TBT and then only switched to splits once they were already accomplished BB’ers, then you’d expect them to be singing the praises of TBT for beginning BB’ers. Yet, strangely enough, the vast majority of them (in fact all of them that I have read) recommend splits to beginners. Sure, sometimes they’ll recommend different types of splits (like Upper/Lower, Push/Pull, etc…), but splits nonetheless.

Even among the Authors who contribute to this site, pretty much all of the Bodybuilders or former BB’ers (JM, Dr Clay Hyght, CT, Shelby Starnes, Scott Abel, etc…) advocate splits. Coincidence, or just a not so subtle bread crumb on the path of success?[/quote]

Maybe I am wrong here but I think the disconnect is that you are looking in terms of absolute for competitive bodybuilding only in your examples. Not building muscle in general, or buidling foundation, balance between strenght/size, or anything not refering to the end product of on stage.

There are tons of authors(um…CT included, look at his background and older stuff) that do advocate it, again none using the absolute end goal of onstage bodybuilding, some of them just dont post anymore. Dan John, Waterbury, Cosgrove, King, even Dave Draper used and advocated a fullbody split in his book. Moral of the story is different strokes for different folks.

Also, aside from my one little joke where I still basically said if you want to look like a bodybuilder or compete onstage TBT is not for you, I am really confused why you think me advocating TBT as a superior way to grow muscle for newbs and a great tool to use 3 or so months of the year(look at my earlier posts) means that I am discrediting body part splits? I mean just look at my very first post here.

Sidenote, I also think you, and the masses, generally downplay the role of drugs in the success of high level bodybuilding and bodypart splits. Some of the authors I mentioned(Cosgrove is one I remember) has gone on at lenghts, on this site no less, that the majority of the trainers advocating splits, if having to train a baseline newb, would no doubt have them do TBT first. [/quote]

I agree people need a base but there many ways to skin a cat.

In terms of Waterbury, Dan ect those guys are strength/conditioning coaches more than bbing coaches. If your goal is strength and conditioning those are the guys I would take most advice from. If the goal over all lots of msucle and aesthetics I would go with Shelby, clay JM ect. Plus that first group of guys IMO do not have Imoressive looks. Better than the general population that’s for sure but that’s kinda easy these days

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]Waittz wrote:

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:
I like the business analogy, because it helps illustrate Waittz’s point, too, I believe.

Let’s say you make your own beer, and it’s pretty good/popular with your friends and neighbors. You go to a consultant to ask how to turn that into a small business. I 100% guarantee you that consultant will not tell you to structure your business like Coors, Bud, etc. You actually have more in common with other small businesses in the food/beverage industry (possibly even other industries) than you do with the behemoth beer manufacturers.

Why? Because you aren’t on their level. Those companies didn’t start doing business the way they are doing it now. They grew, developed, advanced and changed. They had an IPO, hired a board of directors, a CEO, etc. to meet new demands.

Similarly, you don’t start with the end in lifting weights. Yes, I agree that the vast majority of top level guys do splits, but it doesn’t follow that you should necessarily emulate that behavior to get where they are. Is there a lot to learn from those guys? Absolutely, just as a small beer start-up could still learn a lot from Bud, but that doesn’t mean that the start-up should emulate every aspect of the successful giant.

Compare powerlifting to bodybuilding. In the relative world of sports, they are very similar. What do top level powerlifters do to train for their meets? Crazy shit like Smolov, Westside, Sheiko, Bulgarian Wave Training, and very manner of periodization you can think of. If I am a novice or even intermediate powerlifter, does it necessarily follow that I should emulate the top guys? I’m confident most in the know would say “no.” They would recommend progressive overload, or something very simple like 5/3/1, because less advanced trainees don’t need to engage in the same training as pros in order to progress.

To my mind it’s no different in bodybuilding. The advanced and professionals may have discovered that body-part splits are the best programming for them, but that doesn’t mean somebody well below their level couldn’t progress just as easily on TBT.[/quote]

Fair counter point.

Ok, I agree, one should look at how successful people got to be successful, not necessarily what they do once they are already successful to stay successful (even though there is usually quite a bit of overlap there).

So, where are all of the successful BB’ers saying that beginners or intermediates should avoid splits and do TBT instead? In mean, if your assertion is that these people got successful using TBT and then only switched to splits once they were already accomplished BB’ers, then you’d expect them to be singing the praises of TBT for beginning BB’ers. Yet, strangely enough, the vast majority of them (in fact all of them that I have read) recommend splits to beginners. Sure, sometimes they’ll recommend different types of splits (like Upper/Lower, Push/Pull, etc…), but splits nonetheless.

Even among the Authors who contribute to this site, pretty much all of the Bodybuilders or former BB’ers (JM, Dr Clay Hyght, CT, Shelby Starnes, Scott Abel, etc…) advocate splits. Coincidence, or just a not so subtle bread crumb on the path of success?[/quote]

Maybe I am wrong here but I think the disconnect is that you are looking in terms of absolute for competitive bodybuilding only in your examples. Not building muscle in general, or buidling foundation, balance between strenght/size, or anything not refering to the end product of on stage.

There are tons of authors(um…CT included, look at his background and older stuff) that do advocate it, again none using the absolute end goal of onstage bodybuilding, some of them just dont post anymore. Dan John, Waterbury, Cosgrove, King, even Dave Draper used and advocated a fullbody split in his book. Moral of the story is different strokes for different folks.

Also, aside from my one little joke where I still basically said if you want to look like a bodybuilder or compete onstage TBT is not for you, I am really confused why you think me advocating TBT as a superior way to grow muscle for newbs and a great tool to use 3 or so months of the year(look at my earlier posts) means that I am discrediting body part splits? I mean just look at my very first post here.

Sidenote, I also think you, and the masses, generally downplay the role of drugs in the success of high level bodybuilding and bodypart splits. Some of the authors I mentioned(Cosgrove is one I remember) has gone on at lenghts, on this site no less, that the majority of the trainers advocating splits, if having to train a baseline newb, would no doubt have them do TBT first. [/quote]

I agree people need a base but there many ways to skin a cat.

In terms of Waterbury, Dan ect those guys are strength/conditioning coaches more than bbing coaches. If your goal is strength and conditioning those are the guys I would take most advice from. If the goal over all lots of msucle and aesthetics I would go with Shelby, clay JM ect. Plus that first group of guys IMO do not have Imoressive looks. Better than the general population that’s for sure but that’s kinda easy these days [/quote]

Funny you mentioned that part. Waterbury used to be a pretty big dude back in the day. Not sure what happend to him…must have stopped taking the creatinez

[quote]Waittz wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]Waittz wrote:

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:
I like the business analogy, because it helps illustrate Waittz’s point, too, I believe.

Let’s say you make your own beer, and it’s pretty good/popular with your friends and neighbors. You go to a consultant to ask how to turn that into a small business. I 100% guarantee you that consultant will not tell you to structure your business like Coors, Bud, etc. You actually have more in common with other small businesses in the food/beverage industry (possibly even other industries) than you do with the behemoth beer manufacturers.

Why? Because you aren’t on their level. Those companies didn’t start doing business the way they are doing it now. They grew, developed, advanced and changed. They had an IPO, hired a board of directors, a CEO, etc. to meet new demands.

Similarly, you don’t start with the end in lifting weights. Yes, I agree that the vast majority of top level guys do splits, but it doesn’t follow that you should necessarily emulate that behavior to get where they are. Is there a lot to learn from those guys? Absolutely, just as a small beer start-up could still learn a lot from Bud, but that doesn’t mean that the start-up should emulate every aspect of the successful giant.

Compare powerlifting to bodybuilding. In the relative world of sports, they are very similar. What do top level powerlifters do to train for their meets? Crazy shit like Smolov, Westside, Sheiko, Bulgarian Wave Training, and very manner of periodization you can think of. If I am a novice or even intermediate powerlifter, does it necessarily follow that I should emulate the top guys? I’m confident most in the know would say “no.” They would recommend progressive overload, or something very simple like 5/3/1, because less advanced trainees don’t need to engage in the same training as pros in order to progress.

To my mind it’s no different in bodybuilding. The advanced and professionals may have discovered that body-part splits are the best programming for them, but that doesn’t mean somebody well below their level couldn’t progress just as easily on TBT.[/quote]

Fair counter point.

Ok, I agree, one should look at how successful people got to be successful, not necessarily what they do once they are already successful to stay successful (even though there is usually quite a bit of overlap there).

So, where are all of the successful BB’ers saying that beginners or intermediates should avoid splits and do TBT instead? In mean, if your assertion is that these people got successful using TBT and then only switched to splits once they were already accomplished BB’ers, then you’d expect them to be singing the praises of TBT for beginning BB’ers. Yet, strangely enough, the vast majority of them (in fact all of them that I have read) recommend splits to beginners. Sure, sometimes they’ll recommend different types of splits (like Upper/Lower, Push/Pull, etc…), but splits nonetheless.

Even among the Authors who contribute to this site, pretty much all of the Bodybuilders or former BB’ers (JM, Dr Clay Hyght, CT, Shelby Starnes, Scott Abel, etc…) advocate splits. Coincidence, or just a not so subtle bread crumb on the path of success?[/quote]

Maybe I am wrong here but I think the disconnect is that you are looking in terms of absolute for competitive bodybuilding only in your examples. Not building muscle in general, or buidling foundation, balance between strenght/size, or anything not refering to the end product of on stage.

There are tons of authors(um…CT included, look at his background and older stuff) that do advocate it, again none using the absolute end goal of onstage bodybuilding, some of them just dont post anymore. Dan John, Waterbury, Cosgrove, King, even Dave Draper used and advocated a fullbody split in his book. Moral of the story is different strokes for different folks.

Also, aside from my one little joke where I still basically said if you want to look like a bodybuilder or compete onstage TBT is not for you, I am really confused why you think me advocating TBT as a superior way to grow muscle for newbs and a great tool to use 3 or so months of the year(look at my earlier posts) means that I am discrediting body part splits? I mean just look at my very first post here.

Sidenote, I also think you, and the masses, generally downplay the role of drugs in the success of high level bodybuilding and bodypart splits. Some of the authors I mentioned(Cosgrove is one I remember) has gone on at lenghts, on this site no less, that the majority of the trainers advocating splits, if having to train a baseline newb, would no doubt have them do TBT first. [/quote]

I agree people need a base but there many ways to skin a cat.

In terms of Waterbury, Dan ect those guys are strength/conditioning coaches more than bbing coaches. If your goal is strength and conditioning those are the guys I would take most advice from. If the goal over all lots of msucle and aesthetics I would go with Shelby, clay JM ect. Plus that first group of guys IMO do not have Imoressive looks. Better than the general population that’s for sure but that’s kinda easy these days [/quote]

Funny you mentioned that part. Waterbury used to be a pretty big dude back in the day. Not sure what happend to him…must have stopped taking the creatinez[/quote]

Lol. All that water from the creatine.

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]Waittz wrote:

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:
I like the business analogy, because it helps illustrate Waittz’s point, too, I believe.

Let’s say you make your own beer, and it’s pretty good/popular with your friends and neighbors. You go to a consultant to ask how to turn that into a small business. I 100% guarantee you that consultant will not tell you to structure your business like Coors, Bud, etc. You actually have more in common with other small businesses in the food/beverage industry (possibly even other industries) than you do with the behemoth beer manufacturers.

Why? Because you aren’t on their level. Those companies didn’t start doing business the way they are doing it now. They grew, developed, advanced and changed. They had an IPO, hired a board of directors, a CEO, etc. to meet new demands.

Similarly, you don’t start with the end in lifting weights. Yes, I agree that the vast majority of top level guys do splits, but it doesn’t follow that you should necessarily emulate that behavior to get where they are. Is there a lot to learn from those guys? Absolutely, just as a small beer start-up could still learn a lot from Bud, but that doesn’t mean that the start-up should emulate every aspect of the successful giant.

Compare powerlifting to bodybuilding. In the relative world of sports, they are very similar. What do top level powerlifters do to train for their meets? Crazy shit like Smolov, Westside, Sheiko, Bulgarian Wave Training, and very manner of periodization you can think of. If I am a novice or even intermediate powerlifter, does it necessarily follow that I should emulate the top guys? I’m confident most in the know would say “no.” They would recommend progressive overload, or something very simple like 5/3/1, because less advanced trainees don’t need to engage in the same training as pros in order to progress.

To my mind it’s no different in bodybuilding. The advanced and professionals may have discovered that body-part splits are the best programming for them, but that doesn’t mean somebody well below their level couldn’t progress just as easily on TBT.[/quote]

Fair counter point.

Ok, I agree, one should look at how successful people got to be successful, not necessarily what they do once they are already successful to stay successful (even though there is usually quite a bit of overlap there).

So, where are all of the successful BB’ers saying that beginners or intermediates should avoid splits and do TBT instead? In mean, if your assertion is that these people got successful using TBT and then only switched to splits once they were already accomplished BB’ers, then you’d expect them to be singing the praises of TBT for beginning BB’ers. Yet, strangely enough, the vast majority of them (in fact all of them that I have read) recommend splits to beginners. Sure, sometimes they’ll recommend different types of splits (like Upper/Lower, Push/Pull, etc…), but splits nonetheless.

Even among the Authors who contribute to this site, pretty much all of the Bodybuilders or former BB’ers (JM, Dr Clay Hyght, CT, Shelby Starnes, Scott Abel, etc…) advocate splits. Coincidence, or just a not so subtle bread crumb on the path of success?[/quote]

Maybe I am wrong here but I think the disconnect is that you are looking in terms of absolute for competitive bodybuilding only in your examples. Not building muscle in general, or buidling foundation, balance between strenght/size, or anything not refering to the end product of on stage.

There are tons of authors(um…CT included, look at his background and older stuff) that do advocate it, again none using the absolute end goal of onstage bodybuilding, some of them just dont post anymore. Dan John, Waterbury, Cosgrove, King, even Dave Draper used and advocated a fullbody split in his book. Moral of the story is different strokes for different folks.

Also, aside from my one little joke where I still basically said if you want to look like a bodybuilder or compete onstage TBT is not for you, I am really confused why you think me advocating TBT as a superior way to grow muscle for newbs and a great tool to use 3 or so months of the year(look at my earlier posts) means that I am discrediting body part splits? I mean just look at my very first post here.

Sidenote, I also think you, and the masses, generally downplay the role of drugs in the success of high level bodybuilding and bodypart splits. Some of the authors I mentioned(Cosgrove is one I remember) has gone on at lenghts, on this site no less, that the majority of the trainers advocating splits, if having to train a baseline newb, would no doubt have them do TBT first. [/quote]

I agree people need a base but there many ways to skin a cat.

In terms of Waterbury, Dan ect those guys are strength/conditioning coaches more than bbing coaches. If your goal is strength and conditioning those are the guys I would take most advice from. If the goal over all lots of msucle and aesthetics I would go with Shelby, clay JM ect. Plus that first group of guys IMO do not have Imoressive looks. Better than the general population that’s for sure but that’s kinda easy these days [/quote]

Yes, but here’s the thing. those strength and conditioning coaches are generally big and strong dudes with LOTS of muscle mass. It’s certainly perceivable that if they took a BB approach to training for a year or 2, then get sub 10%, bring up some lagging BP’s they’d be jacked as fuq. Have you seen pics when Dave Tate went BBer?

In other words, build as much muscle mass as humanly possibly, then use the strength you’ve earned to sculpt it. Most young dudes on the bro-split are pretty much making scuplting a priority over mass and wonder why they never grow.

[quote]GeeWud wrote:
Technically if we go by the books (NASM) complete newbs should be doing phase 1 stabilization exercises… push ups on stability balls and what not on those giant balls haha.

Nonetheless I think the whole “TBT” term is incorrect anyway. It should be called High Frequency Training or something since the main exercises for TBT vs splits are still the same anyway.[/quote]

The thing about the NASM OPT is that:

  1. as a huge Training organization they are primarily concerned with “doing no harm”. In other words, they understand that the majority of the population is deconditioned and possibly obese. As a result their training model has new clients performing “corrective” exercises which are basically designed to be safe for even the most deconditioned individuals to perform, and which hopefully will take these individuals to a fitness level where you can at least start to train them via regular workout routines

  2. even though doing a whole training block of corrective exercise or having otherwise healthy individuals hold off on more traditional training until all of their imbalances, instabilities, and mobility issues are corrected might actually prevent injuries down the road and produce positive results in terms of how people feel, it’s probably overkill. That said, many people would do well to include some corrective/mobility exercises in their routines on a regular basis.

[quote]giograves wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

I agree people need a base but there many ways to skin a cat.

In terms of Waterbury, Dan ect those guys are strength/conditioning coaches more than bbing coaches. If your goal is strength and conditioning those are the guys I would take most advice from. If the goal over all lots of msucle and aesthetics I would go with Shelby, clay JM ect. Plus that first group of guys IMO do not have Imoressive looks. Better than the general population that’s for sure but that’s kinda easy these days [/quote]

Yes, but here’s the thing. those strength and conditioning coaches are generally big and strong dudes with LOTS of muscle mass. It’s certainly perceivable that if they took a BB approach to training for a year or 2, then get sub 10%, bring up some lagging BP’s they’d be jacked as fuq. Have you seen pics when Dave Tate went BBer?

In other words, build as much muscle mass as humanly possibly, then use the strength you’ve earned to sculpt it. Most young dudes on the bro-split are pretty much making scuplting a priority over mass and wonder why they never grow.
[/quote]

I think our perception is different on big. Strong yes. Big once at 10% or below. Not really. If want post some pics to prove me wrong. Dave Tate a PLer not a strength conditioning guy, and not a Tbt guy is the only one from this site that I have seen cut down and look like he had good size. All the guys mentioned are really not that big. Again they are strong and smart. Though

I thought this was the bigger stronger leaner forum and not the bodybuilding forum?

If your goal is to step on stage oiled up in a speedo the doing a body part split is the way to go.
If your goal is to get bigger stronger and leaner sans speedo then fill body training will do just fine.

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
I thought this was the bigger stronger leaner forum and not the bodybuilding forum?

If your goal is to step on stage oiled up in a speedo the doing a body part split is the way to go.
If your goal is to get bigger stronger and leaner sans speedo then fill body training will do just fine.[/quote]

Depends on how big. How strong. And how lean IMO. I don’t see Tbt being able to take to the upper echelon. So I think it’s very goal specific. Honestly i think all training works to get bigger stronger leaner as long as its not completely stupid.

I think the biggest issue with most newbs is that they haven’t yet built enough of a feel for things to push themselves properly. Structured progressive overloads like Starting Strength, Strong Lifts, and 5/3/1 do a better job of progressing strength than throwing them into a body part split. Or most any split for that matter.

Speaking from experience, most newbs who start out with a bodybuilder split will have to reevaluate and start trying to just add pure strength after an initial period. They need the strength to pack on the mass. Also guys that were athletes, and trained with performance centered programs, before they took on body part splits seem to be much more successful in implementing bodybuilding style training, IME.

Even Joe Weider recommends a full body plan for up to 6 months in “Ultimate Bodybuilding” to bring strength, mind-muscle connection, and the basic movements proficiency to a point that one can begin to take advantage of the more complex splits.

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
I thought this was the bigger stronger leaner forum and not the bodybuilding forum?

If your goal is to step on stage oiled up in a speedo the doing a body part split is the way to go.
If your goal is to get bigger stronger and leaner sans speedo then fill body training will do just fine.[/quote]

Depends on how big. How strong. And how lean IMO. I don’t see Tbt being able to take to the upper echelon. So I think it’s very goal specific. Honestly i think all training works to get bigger stronger leaner as long as its not completely stupid. [/quote]

How big depends on diet and genetics, how strong depends on training, how lean depends on diet and genetics. As for the strong part, lots of powerlifters in the top ranks train full body. Every gold medalist Oly lifter trains full body(that is kind of a joke seeing so every OLY lift is a full body lift…har har…)

[quote]Waittz wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
I thought this was the bigger stronger leaner forum and not the bodybuilding forum?

If your goal is to step on stage oiled up in a speedo the doing a body part split is the way to go.
If your goal is to get bigger stronger and leaner sans speedo then fill body training will do just fine.[/quote]

Depends on how big. How strong. And how lean IMO. I don’t see Tbt being able to take to the upper echelon. So I think it’s very goal specific. Honestly i think all training works to get bigger stronger leaner as long as its not completely stupid. [/quote]

How big depends on diet and genetics, how strong depends on training, how lean depends on diet and genetics. As for the strong part, lots of powerlifters in the top ranks train full body. Every gold medalist Oly lifter trains full body(that is kind of a joke seeing so every OLY lift is a full body lift…har har…) [/quote]

Lol. I guess I don’t know shit about plers other than following storm and Dez from this site both guys and freakishly strong and neither do Tbt. I didn’t think Dan green or any other those guys Tbt but maybe I know nothing that is quite possible