Total Body Training - How Do You Fit Everything In?

[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]

It actually was posted in the BB forum but it got moved for some reason.

As to the other part of your post. I fully agree. If you want the ‘power look’ or god forgive me for saying ‘full house’, or even just a large and lean guy without regards to traditional symmetry or ‘under the radar muscles’ and details, I do not see how Bodypart training is ‘more anabolic’ than TBT.

The main gripe I always here on TBT vs Split is that a TBT split doenst give enough time or detail to the minor things that make a difference on stage. I for one couldnt give a rats ass about my balance and symmetry, hell genetic fucked me there anyway(crooked abs and pecs, but i do want to grow and get lean. how it all looks at the end, well i dont care. I also personally just beleive that I dont really have that much control over it, see the abs/pec comment and the fact that I have capped delts without really training my shoulders outside of OHP until recently.

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[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 [/quote]

That actually goes back to the point of where they are now versus how they got there. Perfect example would be starting strength, or going to any high school powerlifting team training session.

[quote]Waittz wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[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 [/quote]

That actually goes back to the point of where they are now versus how they got there. Perfect example would be starting strength, or going to any high school powerlifting team training session.[/quote]

Stuff like Sheiko is full-body I think. Ben Rice’s training has a lot of full body stuff.

[quote]Spidey22 wrote:

[quote]Waittz wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[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 [/quote]

That actually goes back to the point of where they are now versus how they got there. Perfect example would be starting strength, or going to any high school powerlifting team training session.[/quote]

Stuff like Sheiko is full-body I think. Ben Rice’s training has a lot of full body stuff. [/quote]

Have I convinced you yet to the dark side spidey? Even for just 6 weeks? Symbiote spider-man would totally squat and bench on the same day.

I was going to post this, but then I don’t think I did, but I’m too lazy to look, so deepest apologies if I’m repeating myself:

Another thing to consider is that top level guys are closer to their absolute limitations in terms of strength and hypertrophy. It makes intuitive sense that they would require a split because when you are lifting insane weights near your absolute potential you are of course going to need longer to recover. Whereas, a novice is going to have much quicker recovery/growth turnaround because he simply can’t lift very much. A novice can get away with progressive overload 2-3x a week, so why not milk those gains with TBT?

[quote]Waittz wrote:

[quote]Spidey22 wrote:

[quote]Waittz wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[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 [/quote]

That actually goes back to the point of where they are now versus how they got there. Perfect example would be starting strength, or going to any high school powerlifting team training session.[/quote]

Stuff like Sheiko is full-body I think. Ben Rice’s training has a lot of full body stuff. [/quote]

Have I convinced you yet to the dark side spidey? Even for just 6 weeks? Symbiote spider-man would totally squat and bench on the same day. [/quote]

I use to do Big Beyond Belief, which is the program I’ve made the most gains with probably. Was a Chest/Back/Biceps/Abs and Quads/Hams/Shoulders/Tri split, alternating 6x a week. So I’ve done it before. I’d be more prone to doing it if full-body routines were more frequent. I like being in the gym at least 5 days a week, so that’s why I’m more partial to push/pull style splits.

[quote]giograves 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]

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]

Sure, you could train like Tate did (throw caution to the wind in terms of diet and put on as much mass as humanly possible in the pursuit of maximal absolute strength and quite possibly get injured quite a few times along the way chasing World caliber numbers in the power lifts) for years and years and then finally decide that you want to actually be healthy and look good along with being really strong; hire some high caliber bodybuilding nutritionists to help you eat and train to reach those goals and after a few years of bringing up your weak points and working around your injuries wind up looking awesome. I don’t think anyone is arguing otherwise.

But, if, unlike Tate, your primary goal was to look like a bodybuilder right from the get go, focusing on being a world class Powerlifter seems like kind of an unnecessary detour along the way. Why wouldn’t you just spend those years training everything like a bodybuilder and “cut out the middle man” so to speak?

I’m not saying you don’t try to get stronger, I’m not saying to do only isolation lifts and avoid compound movements altogether (really curious why so many equate such things with bodybuilding in the first place) but why train in a way that isn’t directly going to lead you to your goals?

[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
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]

This definitely depends on the individual, their history (like you stated), where they are getting their information from, and possibly most importantly, who they surround themselves with in the gym. If newbies sought out big strong mentors as training partners to guide them, push them, and hold them accountable there would be a lot less wheel spinning going on.

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
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]

This definitely depends on the individual, their history (like you stated), where they are getting their information from, and possibly most importantly, who they surround themselves with in the gym. If newbies sought out big strong mentors as training partners to guide them, push them, and hold them accountable there would be a lot less wheel spinning going on.[/quote]

And I need to correct myself being as 5/3/1 is a split itself. And I could see that with the right coaching a totally fresh newb (no hs lifting experience) could progress just as well on a well designed split, like 5/3/1 or even an appropriate bodybuilding split.

I think Newbs with good mentors are the exception, however, and when left to their own devices, a newb will usually make their quickest gains in technique and strength with a full body type program. After 3-6 months, they can at least develop some sense of what works for them and I think be better able to apply it in a split. I think that the fullbody workouts do a great job in not only developing a strength base, but in not overloading newbs with to many exercises so that they have the opportunity to improve their technique faster in the basic lifts. Then they can take what they learned about the basic lifts and better apply it to the subsequent lifts that they take on. I think taking on to many new movements at once causes a little information overload.

[quote]jbpick86 wrote:

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
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]

This definitely depends on the individual, their history (like you stated), where they are getting their information from, and possibly most importantly, who they surround themselves with in the gym. If newbies sought out big strong mentors as training partners to guide them, push them, and hold them accountable there would be a lot less wheel spinning going on.[/quote]

And I need to correct myself being as 5/3/1 is a split itself. And I could see that with the right coaching a totally fresh newb (no hs lifting experience) could progress just as well on a well designed split, like 5/3/1 or even an appropriate bodybuilding split.

I think Newbs with good mentors are the exception, however, and when left to their own devices, a newb will usually make their quickest gains in technique and strength with a full body type program. After 3-6 months, they can at least develop some sense of what works for them and I think be better able to apply it in a split. I think that the fullbody workouts do a great job in not only developing a strength base, but in not overloading newbs with to many exercises so that they have the opportunity to improve their technique faster in the basic lifts. Then they can take what they learned about the basic lifts and better apply it to the subsequent lifts that they take on. I think taking on to many new movements at once causes a little information overload.
[/quote]

I do agree with you that many newb’s when left to their own devices place their focus on the wrong things (or at least, place it all on a few things rather than spreading it out and building a solid foundation). And while I don’t disagree that they can make good progress on a full body routine, I don’t see why they couldn’t make just as much progress with a solidly designed split (from someone like CT, JM, or any of the bodybuilding authors on this site).

Most of the problems that I see newb’s in the gym making revolve around making their own workout comprised of 6 inch bench press lockouts, some cheat curls in the squat rack, and maybe some sit-ups thrown in for the hawt abz. Every newbie that I’ve seen come into the gym, train everything (legs, back, biceps, triceps, etc…) in an intelligently designed program has made good progress.

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
But, if, unlike Tate, your primary goal was to look like a bodybuilder right from the get go, focusing on being a world class Powerlifter seems like kind of an unnecessary detour along the way. Why wouldn’t you just spend those years training everything like a bodybuilder and “cut out the middle man” so to speak?

I’m not saying you don’t try to get stronger, I’m not saying to do only isolation lifts and avoid compound movements altogether (really curious why so many equate such things with bodybuilding in the first place) but why train in a way that isn’t directly going to lead you to your goals? [/quote]

I wasn’t suggesting train like a PL then go BBer. It’s just an example IRL where focusing on strength progression creates huge base hypertrophy potential that can be detailed later. Much more so than the dude on the bro-split curling 20s. So in the same breadth that people mistake BB training as isolation training as you suggest, people assume TBT also to be one dimentional, for the compound lifts for life screw everything else crowd and only in the “strength zone” (3-6 reps).

How is training more body parts on the same day at higher weekly frequency, but less days a week is such a tangent to someone’s BIGGER LEANER STRONGER goals, speedo stage ready obviously notwithstanding?

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

[quote]jbpick86 wrote:

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
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]

This definitely depends on the individual, their history (like you stated), where they are getting their information from, and possibly most importantly, who they surround themselves with in the gym. If newbies sought out big strong mentors as training partners to guide them, push them, and hold them accountable there would be a lot less wheel spinning going on.[/quote]

And I need to correct myself being as 5/3/1 is a split itself. And I could see that with the right coaching a totally fresh newb (no hs lifting experience) could progress just as well on a well designed split, like 5/3/1 or even an appropriate bodybuilding split.

I think Newbs with good mentors are the exception, however, and when left to their own devices, a newb will usually make their quickest gains in technique and strength with a full body type program. After 3-6 months, they can at least develop some sense of what works for them and I think be better able to apply it in a split. I think that the fullbody workouts do a great job in not only developing a strength base, but in not overloading newbs with to many exercises so that they have the opportunity to improve their technique faster in the basic lifts. Then they can take what they learned about the basic lifts and better apply it to the subsequent lifts that they take on. I think taking on to many new movements at once causes a little information overload.
[/quote]

I do agree with you that many newb’s when left to their own devices place their focus on the wrong things (or at least, place it all on a few things rather than spreading it out and building a solid foundation). And while I don’t disagree that they can make good progress on a full body routine, I don’t see why they couldn’t make just as much progress with a solidly designed split (from someone like CT, JM, or any of the bodybuilding authors on this site).

Most of the problems that I see newb’s in the gym making revolve around making their own workout comprised of 6 inch bench press lockouts, some cheat curls in the squat rack, and maybe some sit-ups thrown in for the hawt abz. Every newbie that I’ve seen come into the gym, train everything (legs, back, biceps, triceps, etc…) in an intelligently designed program has made good progress.[/quote]

I will concede that a well designed split could probably work just a well for a rank newb. The only thing I may could say would be the added frequency of a TB routine working everything 3 times a week vs two times a week on most newb splits would be beneficial to quickly max out those newb gains. Also, the tinker factor that a lot of newbs are guilty of doesn’t seem quite as detrimental with a TB routine. I mean if someone can butcher Starting Strength in its simplicity to the point that they do around here, a JM, CT, or Starnes routine will end up totally unrecognizable. I guess my point is TB routines are typically more idiot proof.

[quote]giograves wrote:

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
But, if, unlike Tate, your primary goal was to look like a bodybuilder right from the get go, focusing on being a world class Powerlifter seems like kind of an unnecessary detour along the way. Why wouldn’t you just spend those years training everything like a bodybuilder and “cut out the middle man” so to speak?

I’m not saying you don’t try to get stronger, I’m not saying to do only isolation lifts and avoid compound movements altogether (really curious why so many equate such things with bodybuilding in the first place) but why train in a way that isn’t directly going to lead you to your goals? [/quote]

I wasn’t suggesting train like a PL then go BBer. It’s just an example IRL where focusing on strength progression creates huge base hypertrophy potential that can be detailed later. Much more so than the dude on the bro-split curling 20s. So in the same breadth that people mistake BB training as isolation training as you suggest, people assume TBT also to be one dimentional, for the compound lifts for life screw everything else crowd and only in the “strength zone” (3-6 reps).

How is training more body parts on the same day at higher weekly frequency, but less days a week is such a tangent to someone’s BIGGER LEANER STRONGER goals, speedo stage ready obviously notwithstanding?
[/quote]

I know what you meant, but using Tate as an example without taking into account how Tate actually trained to get to where he is (or was when he finally cut down) as an example of why TBT is a good option to make you huge and crazy strong is a little misleading.

Training more body parts on the same day at a greater frequency could be perfectly fine, but unless you’ve got crazy good natural recovery abilities, come from an athletic or lifestyle background that has built a very high work capacity, or are assisted, you are either going to have to phone those later body parts in (during your workouts), really hold back on the earlier body parts, and quite possibly never give your muscles enough time to recover between sessions to actually grow and improve.

This might not be the case when you are a true rank beginner and are still learning how to do the movements or really don’t know how to push yourself hard, but it’s going to become an issue once you get a little stronger and start to push yourself. By the time you were to squat intensely, then hit your back intensely with BB rows or weighted pull-ups, you are going to be way too shot to be able to bench with any kind of intensity. And even if you really gut out the bench, how much energy are you going to have left to hit stuff like arms, abs/core, calves, side/rear delts, rotator cuff, etc…?

And even if you did have the energy, the body needs sufficient time and nutrients to be able to repair and improve itself, otherwise you are just building neuromuscular efficiency at best or spinning your wheels at worse. If you’ve ever trained any newbies you’d know that they are often sore for an extended period of time after their first few sessions (especially legs). The only way you are going to get them to be able to hit that muscle group again two more times that week is to:

  1. not have them push very hard at all during their workouts and just purely work on lifting technique (could possibly be beneficial in the long run, but isn’t going to produce much in the way of noticeable physique changes)

  2. use such low volume (like SS’s 3x5) so that you don’t really produce any physiological damage (which also means very little reason for the body to improve it’s muscular system) and instead most of the gains are due to improvements in neuromuscular efficiency.

  3. take several months to years to have them build up their work capacity to where they can actually lift heavy multiple times per week (think Olympic lifters)

  4. put the rest of the body on maintenance so that all of the body’s energy and recovery efforts can go to repairing and improving that body part

IMO, that’s not even a great idea if performance was your primary concern (hence why PL’ers, football players, MMA fighters, Gymnasts, Strongmen, etc…don’t train with full body routines), but for physique it’s going to leave most people with glaring weaknesses and a very “blocky”/torso heavy physique (think Rippetoe or Dan Johnesque physiques).

You could somewhat counteract this by upping the frequency even higher ala some of Waterbury’s routines which would allow you to rotate the order of your exercises to give each body part sufficient energy, make up for the lack of intensity and volume that must be utilized during each TBT workout by increasing the requency of stimulation, this in essence evening out the volume on a weekly/monthly timeline that someone else might perform in a split routine. Why you would want to go to that length though is a question that I don’t have an answer to personally.

But just 3 times a week, I don’t see that working out too well. But, hey, if it’s working for you, more power to you.

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

[quote]giograves wrote:

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
But, if, unlike Tate, your primary goal was to look like a bodybuilder right from the get go, focusing on being a world class Powerlifter seems like kind of an unnecessary detour along the way. Why wouldn’t you just spend those years training everything like a bodybuilder and “cut out the middle man” so to speak?

I’m not saying you don’t try to get stronger, I’m not saying to do only isolation lifts and avoid compound movements altogether (really curious why so many equate such things with bodybuilding in the first place) but why train in a way that isn’t directly going to lead you to your goals? [/quote]

I wasn’t suggesting train like a PL then go BBer. It’s just an example IRL where focusing on strength progression creates huge base hypertrophy potential that can be detailed later. Much more so than the dude on the bro-split curling 20s. So in the same breadth that people mistake BB training as isolation training as you suggest, people assume TBT also to be one dimentional, for the compound lifts for life screw everything else crowd and only in the “strength zone” (3-6 reps).

How is training more body parts on the same day at higher weekly frequency, but less days a week is such a tangent to someone’s BIGGER LEANER STRONGER goals, speedo stage ready obviously notwithstanding?
[/quote]

I know what you meant, but using Tate as an example without taking into account how Tate actually trained to get to where he is (or was when he finally cut down) as an example of why TBT is a good option to make you huge and crazy strong is a little misleading.

Training more body parts on the same day at a greater frequency could be perfectly fine, but unless you’ve got crazy good natural recovery abilities, come from an athletic or lifestyle background that has built a very high work capacity, or are assisted, you are either going to have to phone those later body parts in (during your workouts), really hold back on the earlier body parts, and quite possibly never give your muscles enough time to recover between sessions to actually grow and improve.

This might not be the case when you are a true rank beginner and are still learning how to do the movements or really don’t know how to push yourself hard, but it’s going to become an issue once you get a little stronger and start to push yourself. By the time you were to squat intensely, then hit your back intensely with BB rows or weighted pull-ups, you are going to be way too shot to be able to bench with any kind of intensity. And even if you really gut out the bench, how much energy are you going to have left to hit stuff like arms, abs/core, calves, side/rear delts, rotator cuff, etc…?

And even if you did have the energy, the body needs sufficient time and nutrients to be able to repair and improve itself, otherwise you are just building neuromuscular efficiency at best or spinning your wheels at worse. If you’ve ever trained any newbies you’d know that they are often sore for an extended period of time after their first few sessions (especially legs). The only way you are going to get them to be able to hit that muscle group again two more times that week is to:

  1. not have them push very hard at all during their workouts and just purely work on lifting technique (could possibly be beneficial in the long run, but isn’t going to produce much in the way of noticeable physique changes)

  2. use such low volume (like SS’s 3x5) so that you don’t really produce any physiological damage (which also means very little reason for the body to improve it’s muscular system) and instead most of the gains are due to improvements in neuromuscular efficiency.

  3. take several months to years to have them build up their work capacity to where they can actually lift heavy multiple times per week (think Olympic lifters)

  4. put the rest of the body on maintenance so that all of the body’s energy and recovery efforts can go to repairing and improving that body part

IMO, that’s not even a great idea if performance was your primary concern (hence why PL’ers, football players, MMA fighters, Gymnasts, Strongmen, etc…don’t train with full body routines), but for physique it’s going to leave most people with glaring weaknesses and a very “blocky”/torso heavy physique (think Rippetoe or Dan Johnesque physiques).

You could somewhat counteract this by upping the frequency even higher ala some of Waterbury’s routines which would allow you to rotate the order of your exercises to give each body part sufficient energy, make up for the lack of intensity and volume that must be utilized during each TBT workout by increasing the requency of stimulation, this in essence evening out the volume on a weekly/monthly timeline that someone else might perform in a split routine. Why you would want to go to that length though is a question that I don’t have an answer to personally.

But just 3 times a week, I don’t see that working out too well. But, hey, if it’s working for you, more power to you.[/quote]

All very well thought points.

Though, not sure how the reverse argument couldn’t be made on recovery. Granted purely individual thing, but on a 5 day split with tons of volume, where even the muscles that aren’t being trained directly are being recruited (like triceps on chest day) the very same argument of lack of recovery can be made.

The trainee with under 2-3 years’ time under the bar and not some LeBron James freak of nature… how much muscle fiber can he realistically recruit that would be that taxing? The argument I’d say is not whether TBT > Split for BBing or vice versa, but when is the right time to go from TBT, to Push Pull Legs, to Upper/Lower, to complete body part split? Most here seem to suggest from level 1 to 2/3 after 6 months. I’m inclined to think if your still not meeting some base strength minimums (squatting 1.5x BW or Benching 1.25xBW, etc.), YMMV but this could be 2 or more years.

Anecdotally, I admit I see way more people fail on bro-splits, and the ones that do succeed (like my best bro) are the types to grow from just looking at a barbell anyway, so I’m certainly partial. The guys I’ve seen make the greatest zero to hero transforms trained more athletically, typically TBT.

I think its pretty obvious that TBT will build a big, strong son of a bitch… Especially if you get after and keep it brutal it like Jamie Lewis over at Chaos and Pain. He is a mad man though and trains well beyond the bounds of most people.

However, I think its fairly well established that if you want to LOOK LIKE A BODY BUILDER (aka, someone who cares about their sartorius, gastrocnemius, and adductors lets say) , you’re BEST BET is to follow in those foot steps and utilize some kind of split. This allows you to hit all the muscles with enough volume to develop them and provides enough recovery from all the extra volume needed to hit everything.

[quote]giograves wrote:

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:

[quote]giograves wrote:

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
But, if, unlike Tate, your primary goal was to look like a bodybuilder right from the get go, focusing on being a world class Powerlifter seems like kind of an unnecessary detour along the way. Why wouldn’t you just spend those years training everything like a bodybuilder and “cut out the middle man” so to speak?

I’m not saying you don’t try to get stronger, I’m not saying to do only isolation lifts and avoid compound movements altogether (really curious why so many equate such things with bodybuilding in the first place) but why train in a way that isn’t directly going to lead you to your goals? [/quote]

I wasn’t suggesting train like a PL then go BBer. It’s just an example IRL where focusing on strength progression creates huge base hypertrophy potential that can be detailed later. Much more so than the dude on the bro-split curling 20s. So in the same breadth that people mistake BB training as isolation training as you suggest, people assume TBT also to be one dimentional, for the compound lifts for life screw everything else crowd and only in the “strength zone” (3-6 reps).

How is training more body parts on the same day at higher weekly frequency, but less days a week is such a tangent to someone’s BIGGER LEANER STRONGER goals, speedo stage ready obviously notwithstanding?
[/quote]

I know what you meant, but using Tate as an example without taking into account how Tate actually trained to get to where he is (or was when he finally cut down) as an example of why TBT is a good option to make you huge and crazy strong is a little misleading.

Training more body parts on the same day at a greater frequency could be perfectly fine, but unless you’ve got crazy good natural recovery abilities, come from an athletic or lifestyle background that has built a very high work capacity, or are assisted, you are either going to have to phone those later body parts in (during your workouts), really hold back on the earlier body parts, and quite possibly never give your muscles enough time to recover between sessions to actually grow and improve.

This might not be the case when you are a true rank beginner and are still learning how to do the movements or really don’t know how to push yourself hard, but it’s going to become an issue once you get a little stronger and start to push yourself. By the time you were to squat intensely, then hit your back intensely with BB rows or weighted pull-ups, you are going to be way too shot to be able to bench with any kind of intensity. And even if you really gut out the bench, how much energy are you going to have left to hit stuff like arms, abs/core, calves, side/rear delts, rotator cuff, etc…?

And even if you did have the energy, the body needs sufficient time and nutrients to be able to repair and improve itself, otherwise you are just building neuromuscular efficiency at best or spinning your wheels at worse. If you’ve ever trained any newbies you’d know that they are often sore for an extended period of time after their first few sessions (especially legs). The only way you are going to get them to be able to hit that muscle group again two more times that week is to:

  1. not have them push very hard at all during their workouts and just purely work on lifting technique (could possibly be beneficial in the long run, but isn’t going to produce much in the way of noticeable physique changes)

  2. use such low volume (like SS’s 3x5) so that you don’t really produce any physiological damage (which also means very little reason for the body to improve it’s muscular system) and instead most of the gains are due to improvements in neuromuscular efficiency.

  3. take several months to years to have them build up their work capacity to where they can actually lift heavy multiple times per week (think Olympic lifters)

  4. put the rest of the body on maintenance so that all of the body’s energy and recovery efforts can go to repairing and improving that body part

IMO, that’s not even a great idea if performance was your primary concern (hence why PL’ers, football players, MMA fighters, Gymnasts, Strongmen, etc…don’t train with full body routines), but for physique it’s going to leave most people with glaring weaknesses and a very “blocky”/torso heavy physique (think Rippetoe or Dan Johnesque physiques).

You could somewhat counteract this by upping the frequency even higher ala some of Waterbury’s routines which would allow you to rotate the order of your exercises to give each body part sufficient energy, make up for the lack of intensity and volume that must be utilized during each TBT workout by increasing the requency of stimulation, this in essence evening out the volume on a weekly/monthly timeline that someone else might perform in a split routine. Why you would want to go to that length though is a question that I don’t have an answer to personally.

But just 3 times a week, I don’t see that working out too well. But, hey, if it’s working for you, more power to you.[/quote]

All very well thought points.

Though, not sure how the reverse argument couldn’t be made on recovery. Granted purely individual thing, but on a 5 day split with tons of volume, where even the muscles that aren’t being trained directly are being recruited (like triceps on chest day) the very same argument of lack of recovery can be made.

The trainee with under 2-3 years’ time under the bar and not some LeBron James freak of nature… how much muscle fiber can he realistically recruit that would be that taxing? The argument I’d say is not whether TBT > Split for BBing or vice versa, but when is the right time to go from TBT, to Push Pull Legs, to Upper/Lower, to complete body part split? Most here seem to suggest from level 1 to 2/3 after 6 months. I’m inclined to think if your still not meeting some base strength minimums (squatting 1.5x BW or Benching 1.25xBW, etc.), YMMV but this could be 2 or more years.

Anecdotally, I admit I see way more people fail on bro-splits, and the ones that do succeed (like my best bro) are the types to grow from just looking at a barbell anyway, so I’m certainly partial. The guys I’ve seen make the greatest zero to hero transforms trained more athletically, typically TBT.

[/quote]

Scheduling of body parts and the effects on recovery in terms of carryover is definitely something that needs to be taken into consideration when designing a split. That’s generally why it is best to follow splits created by experienced BB’ers/BB’ing coaches.

I don’t necessarily disagree with your second statement about progressing from one type of program to another. I still don’t think you need to start with TBT, but if someone chose to do so, I would tell them to do what you suggest.

The thing about full body programs vs splits and seeing people succeed fail on them is that far more people perform splits (pick up any Muscle mag off a rack and you’re sure to find quite a few split routines supposedly written by pro BB’ers (but in reality often written by "ghos"t authors). Sadly, this is where many newbies get their training information. Some find programs on the Internet and follow them (which may be just as theoretical and untested/unproven as the Muscle mag routines), and finally some get their routines from an accomplished mentor or coach in person at the gym.

So, since more people are doing split routines, you are bound to get more people who succeed with them, but you are also going to get more people who fail with them (simply a numbers game thing).

Personally though, the only guys who I have ever seen reach a truly impressive amounts of muscle and strength have trained using splits. I have known a few who reached very impressive degrees of pure strength training with what could be considered full body routines (more closely resembling strongman training than what is usually written about in regards to TBT), but unless they were already somewhat genetically predisposed to being lean and muscular, their physiques did/do not resemble what most people would prefer to look like from lifting weights.

I’m not going to discount what you have witnessed either though. Again, of it’s working, that’s really all that matters.

[quote]Lonnie123 wrote:
I think its pretty obvious that TBT will build a big, strong son of a bitch… Especially if you get after and keep it brutal it like Jamie Lewis over at Chaos and Pain. He is a mad man though and trains well beyond the bounds of most people.

However, I think its fairly well established that if you want to LOOK LIKE A BODY BUILDER (aka, someone who cares about their sartorius, gastrocnemius, and adductors lets say) , you’re BEST BET is to follow in those foot steps and utilize some kind of split. This allows you to hit all the muscles with enough volume to develop them and provides enough recovery from all the extra volume needed to hit everything.[/quote]

This

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[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.[/quote]

Storm trains like 21 times per week. At that point, it’s irrelevant.

Det’s best gains on his total (300 lbs in 18 months I believe) came training high volume, full body 3-4x/week. I know for sure because I wrote those programs.