What Routine Worked Best For You?

Training Bodybuilding
61

[quote]Professor X wrote:

How has it worked for you? How much muscle have you gained specifically and how many years have you been lifting?[/quote]

Been lifting for about 4 years, im only 19 mind you. That being said i originally put on around 20 lbs using a split routine my first 3 years of lifting. As i said earlier i was 5’10 165lbs @ 10% bodyfat. After TBT for a year, i’m currently at 190 lbs with 8% bodyfat.

Obviously as i age the next few years im goin to get bigger, but 20 lbs in a year while dropping bodyfat are significant results. Now do i think that it’s all from TBT? Hell no, for we all know how important rest, diet, etc are to building muscle.

Boris Kleine was a 3x german champion who trained using full body workouts, as well as the infamous Steve Reeves…

Because i find myself getting lazy after awhile, a prime example would be that i find myself skipping my leg days, and then continueing with w/e would be next the next day. So if i hate doing legs, why would i look forward to doing them on the day i’m supposed to?

Atleast when i use a TBT routine i do them first, so that i can look forward to getting them done and getting to the rest of my workout, and because i enjoy the other lifts 100x more than any leg excercise, i don’t skip workouts like i used to. Once again, this is just me.

62

All of this split vs TBT stuff is a joke. Everyone seems to think one of two things: that either whatever worked for him or her will work for one person, or whatever worked for others will work for one person. It’s not that easy. Take what you can from the posters and the articles on this site, but realize that the results you get are specific to you and nobody else on this planet.

Find out what works for YOU. If a split routine is working, continue it. If TBT is working, continue it. This nonsense with arguing which is best is an exercise in futility. NOBODY has any worthwhile evidence that one is better than the other.

63

As i’ve been saying the whole time. I find TBT to be most effective for me and that i would recommend it, not that i’d guarantee results…

64

The OP was thinking of using HSS-100. Very few people have already answered him, which is dumb.

HSS-100 works great.

It may not make you faster, or a better athlete, or a better fighter, but like the Professor said, it will build your body. Which is the whole idea, presumably. Provided you eat/recover right, you’ll grow.

It’s a sweet system and infinitely flexible. I’ve customized the movements over time as the originals got stagnant and have continued to like what I’m seeing from it. Program choice depends on your goals, but if bodybuilding is your goal, give it a try.

65

[quote]mrw173 wrote:
All of this split vs TBT stuff is a joke. Everyone seems to think one of two things: that either whatever worked for him or her will work for one person, or whatever worked for others will work for one person. It’s not that easy. Take what you can from the posters and the articles on this site, but realize that the results you get are specific to you and nobody else on this planet.

Find out what works for YOU. If a split routine is working, continue it. If TBT is working, continue it. This nonsense with arguing which is best is an exercise in futility. NOBODY has any worthwhile evidence that one is better than the other.[/quote]

I agree that this whole argument is bullshit. I feel that bodypart splits work best. BUT I still grow with full-body as well. And I be shocked as shit if the most developed lifter on these forums switched over and continued training with proper intensity and kept up their food intake and suddenly stopped growing.

66

[quote]mrw173 wrote:
All of this split vs TBT stuff is a joke. Everyone seems to think one of two things: that either whatever worked for him or her will work for one person, or whatever worked for others will work for one person. It’s not that easy. Take what you can from the posters and the articles on this site, but realize that the results you get are specific to you and nobody else on this planet.

Find out what works for YOU. If a split routine is working, continue it. If TBT is working, continue it. This nonsense with arguing which is best is an exercise in futility. NOBODY has any worthwhile evidence that one is better than the other.[/quote]

Bingo!

Something else needs to be addressed, and that is a persons definition of ‘body building’. This isn’t something that has a wrong answer. Body building is just that, building the body. To some, it may be gaining as much overall muscle mass as possible. Is that wrong? No, its not if that is their idea of BB. Is gaining as much strength as possible the wrong idea? No, again it is not. Both are ‘building’ your body.

Many have the idea that BB is being in or working towards competition shape i.e. mass, definition, low BF etc. That is fine and if it works for you as a definition/goal that is all that counts. But it is important to realize that not everyone looks at the words BB in the same light.

My personal view of BB is gaining muscle mass, strength, an aethstetic appearance that is proportioned correctly and functionality. I’ve mentioned combat pyramids. A few have made some sarcastic remarks about them, but I feel something like pyramids is essential to the complete BB package for the way I view this life style. Thats me, thats my opinion. If your mileage varies, thats fine. To me personally, I don’t have a use for only being able to press x amount above my body weight. Remember, I said ONLY. I feel being able to press, squat etc x amount above BW is important. I feel having as much muscle mass as is proportionate to one’s frame is important. But in my opinion, and for what I NEED in my career and lifestyle is to ALSO be able to do something like a 1-20-1 pyramid as well as proper diet, rest etc. To ME that is a complete package. To ME that is BB. Again, just my definition for my needs. If your definition/needs/goals are different…not a problem. It HAS to work for YOU.

Just a thought.

67

Boris Kleine does use HST but he does use a split if I recall correctly. Bryan Haycock once had a posting on his site of Boris’s training schedule. It had high frequency but was still not a TBT routine.

The title of this thread is “What Program Worked Best For YOU”. I guess the words “working best” refer to what worked best for reaching your PERSONAL GOALS. Obviously not everyone wants to look, train, and live like a bodybuilder as people have different priorities in life. I have personally made bodybuilding a top priority. I do not consider it a sacrfice because quite honestly, I think I might be a boring guy otherwise. I do not own a TV, nor do I give a shit about the pop culture trash that is featured on TV. I honestly do not give a shit about politics. I do not drink excessively, nor do I give a rat’s ass about bars and clubs. I do not plan on getting married for another 7 years at least! So, I do not have anchors that intefere with my progressing in bodybuilding. I guess I am a bit self absorbed, like most serious BBers, recreational or otherwise.

Therefore, I can adopt split routines and any other lifestyle practice that a bodybuilder does, aside from sitting on my ass and not having a career, a luxury SOME men on this earth have because of a sponsor. I plan on entering my first natural show next year. This is my goal, to participate in bodybuilding. I do not have elite genetics, nor do I have shit genetics.I would say on a scale of 1 - 10, I rank 7 in terms of genetics. Above average, but definitely not the best.
All I am saying here is that one should find what works best for THEIR goals. If one wants to gain SOME muscle and have decent fitness levels, go for TBT or upper/lower split routine. If you succeed, great!

Those who want to get jacked as possible, use a TBT and adopt the right lifestyle.
BUT…when discussing what is best for gaining as much mass as possible, it is clear that a split routine is best, regardless of what people’s personal goals are. AGAIN, this is simply because the most muscular men on this earth have gotten to where they are with split routines hundreds, if not thousands, of times over! If TBT did produce more muscle than split routines 1000s OF TIMES OVER, I am CERTAIN that today’s top bodybuilders would adopt this form of training.
Yes, I remember AC discussing that topic. I know he does use MOVEMENT based splits. What I meant was that he is not fond of BODYPART splits because of the inherent flaws in them. All programs have flaws and he would agree with this as well. I do think bodypart splits are not as balanced as a movement based split in terms of balancing muscle tension and strength in specific planes of motion. However, there is risk in some endeavors and I guess bodybuilding does bring some risk with it.

I have benefited from the writings of non BB guys like EC and AC tremendously and have incorporated some of their principles into my bodypart splits to a degree, especially with flexibility, mobility, and warming up and paying some attention to balance within a program.
But I DO get tired of the sneers and jokes aimed at bodybuilders when it happens over and over and over again. Like:
-Bodybuilders are not strong for their size; they are all show and no go.

-Bodyuilding training is dysfunctional. Again, I thought for something to be functional it had to serve a purpose. Bodybuilding training has a purpose, to get jacked!
-Bodybuilders do not “compete.” OK, we get it, maybe its more of a show/exhibition than a competition.

-"Do not listen to those guys at the gym that are all jacked. They are all on 'roids and all they say is to eat more protein. You do not need to eat all that protein. A lot of dietitians say this shit. I happen to be a dietitian myself and am finishing a master degree in nutrition. However, some bodybuilders could teach some RDs how to lose some weight in a hurry, rather than follow their silly pyramid, high carb, low protein diets, while fearing that anynone who ingests more than 30 g of pro in a sitting is going to drop dead of end stage renal disease. Many bodybuilders do not know what the fuck they are talking about, even some advanced ones, and couldn’t nutritionally advise or train someone if their life depended on it. However, some are very intelligent and know their shit very well, training, nutrition, and otherwise. The IFBB pro Colette Nelson happens to be a dietitian. Lonnie Lowery is one. Loads of other BBers without degrees in nutrition know some stuff too.

-Big biceps, pecs, and quads are “useless”. I do not know about this one. Perhaps HUGE quads, bis, and pecs are not necessary for athletic feats, but these muscles do contract in physical performance and some athletes do need mass in these areas, particularly strongman events and powerlifting.

Whatever. With all this ranting, at the end of the day, it all matters what kind of results you want and if you succeed in getting them and whether you actually LIKE and ENJOY what you are doing. When I was younger, I would experiment with some of these cookie cutter routines here on T-mag and training became an utter nightmare! Counting rest periods, reps, tempos, and rest intervals, trying to hog two to three pieces of equipent for agonist/antagonist or some other pairings, and then record all of this data. My hobby turned miserable and I thought that this was the way to go and the other stuff in “Muscle and Fiction”, as all these strength geeks like to call it, was just junk. I returned to more simple split routines, probably some that even resembled what came out of the muscle rags and the gains came along again. I was HAPPY as well!

Meanwhile, I realized that I did learn a lot of things from the muscle mags like Musclemag International (Ron Harris, Will Brink, Greg Zulak were some good authors), Muscle Media when it was good, Iron Man (best newsstand mag in my opinion, has some really good shit, especially when Duchaine wrote for it), and yes, even Flex and M&F! Natural Bodybuilding magazine is eh/OK too SOMETIMES. One should keep in mind that the authors of these magazines might not be the most cerebral strength coaches but they have studied and practiced bodybuilding for DECADES! That says something! That’s not “FICTION” to them!

68

[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
Boris Kleine does use HST but he does use a split if I recall correctly. Bryan Haycock once had a posting on his site of Boris’s training schedule. It had high frequency but was still not a TBT routine.
The title of this thread is “What Program Worked Best For YOU”. I guess the words “working best” refer to what worked best for reaching your PERSONAL GOALS. Obviously not everyone wants to look, train, and live like a bodybuilder as people have different priorities in life. I have personally made bodybuilding a top priority. I do not consider it a sacrfice because quite honestly, I think I might be a boring guy otherwise. I do not own a TV, nor do I give a shit about the pop culture trash that is featured on TV. I honestly do not give a shit about politics. I do not drink excessively, nor do I give a rat’s ass about bars and clubs. I do not plan on getting married for another 7 years at least! So, I do not have anchors that intefere with my progressing in bodybuilding. I guess I am a bit self absorbed, like most serious BBers, recreational or otherwise. Therefore, I can adopt split routines and any other lifestyle practice that a bodybuilder does, aside from sitting on my ass and not having a career, a luxury SOME men on this earth have because of a sponsor. I plan on entering my first natural show next year. This is my goal, to participate in bodybuilding. I do not have elite genetics, nor do I have shit genetics.I would say on a scale of 1 - 10, I rank 7 in terms of genetics. Above average, but definitely not the best.
All I am saying here is that one should find what works best for THEIR goals. If one wants to gain SOME muscle and have decent fitness levels, go for TBT or upper/lower split routine. If you succeed, great!
Those who want to get jacked as possible, use a TBT and adopt the right lifestyle.
BUT…when discussing what is best for gaining as much mass as possible, it is clear that a split routine is best, regardless of what people’s personal goals are. AGAIN, this is simply because the most muscular men on this earth have gotten to where they are with split routines hundreds, if not thousands, of times over! If TBT did produce more muscle than split routines 1000s OF TIMES OVER, I am CERTAIN that today’s top bodybuilders would adopt this form of training.
Yes, I remember AC discussing that topic. I know he does use MOVEMENT based splits. What I meant was that he is not fond of BODYPART splits because of the inherent flaws in them. All programs have flaws and he would agree with this as well. I do think bodypart splits are not as balanced as a movement based split in terms of balancing muscle tension and strength in specific planes of motion. However, there is risk in some endeavors and I guess bodybuilding does bring some risk with it.
I have benefited from the writings of non BB guys like EC and AC tremendously and have incorporated some of their principles into my bodypart splits to a degree, especially with flexibility, mobility, and warming up and paying some attention to balance within a program.
But I DO get tired of the sneers and jokes aimed at bodybuilders when it happens over and over and over again. Like:
-Bodybuilders are not strong for their size; they are all show and no go.
-Bodyuilding training is dysfunctional. Again, I thought for something to be functional it had to serve a purpose. Bodybuilding training has a purpose, to get jacked!
-Bodybuilders do not “compete.” OK, we get it, maybe its more of a show/exhibition than a competition.
-"Do not listen to those guys at the gym that are all jacked. They are all on 'roids and all they say is to eat more protein. You do not need to eat all that protein. A lot of dietitians say this shit. I happen to be a dietitian myself and am finishing a master degree in nutrition. However, some bodybuilders could teach some RDs how to lose some weight in a hurry, rather than follow their silly pyramid, high carb, low protein diets, while fearing that anynone who ingests more than 30 g of pro in a sitting is going to drop dead of end stage renal disease. Many bodybuilders do not know what the fuck they are talking about, even some advanced ones, and couldn’t nutritionally advise or train someone if their life depended on it. However, some are very intelligent and know their shit very well, training, nutrition, and otherwise. The IFBB pro Colette Nelson happens to be a dietitian. Lonnie Lowery is one. Loads of other BBers without degrees in nutrition know some stuff too.
-Big biceps, pecs, and quads are “useless”. I do not know about this one. Perhaps HUGE quads, bis, and pecs are not necessary for athletic feats, but these muscles do contract in physical performance and some athletes do need mass in these areas, particularly strongman events and powerlifting.
Whatever. With all this ranting, at the end of the day, it all matters what kind of results you want and if you succeed in getting them and whether you actually LIKE and ENJOY what you are doing. When I was younger, I would experiment with some of these cookie cutter routines here on T-mag and training became an utter nightmare! Counting rest periods, reps, tempos, and rest intervals, trying to hog two to three pieces of equipent for agonist/antagonist or some other pairings, and then record all of this data. My hobby turned miserable and I thought that this was the way to go and the other stuff in “Muscle and Fiction”, as all these strength geeks like to call it, was just junk. I returned to more simple split routines, probably some that even resembled what came out of the muscle rags and the gains came along again. I was HAPPY as well!

Meanwhile, I realized that I did learn a lot of things from the muscle mags like Musclemag International (Ron Harris, Will Brink, Greg Zulak were some good authors), Muscle Media when it was good, Iron Man (best newsstand mag in my opinion, has some really good shit, especially when Duchaine wrote for it), and yes, even Flex and M&F! Natural Bodybuilding magazine is eh/OK too SOMETIMES. One should keep in mind that the authors of these magazines might not be the most cerebral strength coaches but they have studied and practiced bodybuilding for DECADES! That says something! That’s not “FICTION” to them! [/quote]

Good post…even though I would have used more paragraphs.

69

[quote]TRAJJ wrote:

Something else needs to be addressed, and that is a persons definition of ‘body building’. This isn’t something that has a wrong answer. Body building is just that, building the body. To some, it may be gaining as much overall muscle mass as possible. Is that wrong? No, its not if that is their idea of BB. Is gaining as much strength as possible the wrong idea? No, again it is not. Both are ‘building’ your body.

Many have the idea that BB is being in or working towards competition shape i.e. mass, definition, low BF etc. That is fine and if it works for you as a definition/goal that is all that counts. But it is important to realize that not everyone looks at the words BB in the same light.
[/quote]

Bodybuilding has had the same general definition for decades (actually, about a full century now). It is only recently that people are trying to come up with new meanings for it. It still means building your body. Whether your goals are strength, jumping rope, or hang gliding, that doesn’t change the definition of BODYBUILDING. It also doesn’t mean that we ignore the actual progress someone has made when they claim something works for BODYBUILDING.

My goals include strength (as I am sure goes for many bodybuilders considering you won’t find many weak huge bodybuilders walking around). It takes a great deal of strength to even get that big. That doesn’t mean you start comparing bodybuilders to powerlifters. It doesn’t mean you compare bodybuilders to random karate students or golf players or mixed martial art participants.

Bodybuilding is about getting bigger and stronger with an emphasis on body shape as the final goal. I think many are lost in that they think they can skip the years of building a solid base of muscle mass before they try to cut down to extremely low levels of body fat. That is also probably why truly large bodybuilders are such a rarity lately.

Bodybuilding doesn’t need any new definitions. People need to simply figure out what their own personal goals are and stop trying to degrade what bodybuilding has always been.

70

[quote]pietran30 wrote:
I wholeheartedly agree, i actually know friends of mine who used steroids and did nothing but gain fat off of them lol. Don’t get me wrong though, genetics and effort are definately the base of all progress as u previously stated. I was merely stating that the professional bodybuilding world today revolves around steroids. If you can honestly try to tell me any of the mr. olympia competitors never used a drug a day in their life, than i’d have to say you are the most naive person i’ve come in contact with.

The point i’m trying to make is that new scientific studies are showing that for hypertrophy TBT seems to be more effective. I respect your opinions and i’m sure u’ve made incredible gains off of split training, as have i. Personally, i started an HST program about a year ago, and will never go back. I started at 5’10 165 lb @ 10% bodyfat, and am currently around 190 lbs with 8% bodyfat. I’ve gained a substantial amount of strength off of HST as well as my bench press has progressed from 275 to my now 1 rep max of 325.

I’m certainly not knocking on Split training, I’m just saying that for you to say that you know for pure fact that split training is better for putting on mass than TBT is just plain ignorant…
[/quote]

Isnt this due to the fact that in whole body training the whole body gets a training stimulus more times a week than with a split? Thus, more OVERALL muscle mass?

With a split though, once this bulk has been achieved with TBT, it is possible to induce the specific hypertrophies of particular bodyparts to make some bigger than others to induce the “proportionate” look… capped delts, lateral quads, equal arms and lower leg girth, detailed back…

Just a thought…

Joe

71

[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
With all this ranting, at the end of the day, it all matters what kind of results you want and if you succeed in getting them and whether you actually LIKE and ENJOY what you are doing. When I was younger, I would experiment with some of these cookie cutter routines here on T-mag and training became an utter nightmare! Counting rest periods, reps, tempos, and rest intervals, trying to hog two to three pieces of equipent for agonist/antagonist or some other pairings, and then record all of this data. My hobby turned miserable and I thought that this was the way to go and the other stuff in “Muscle and Fiction”, as all these strength geeks like to call it, was just junk. I returned to more simple split routines, probably some that even resembled what came out of the muscle rags and the gains came along again. I was HAPPY as well!

[/quote]

I completely agree with this; as I’ve had the same experience.

My life is too structured already for me to do the same with my hobby. Some people feel that if you aren’t recording every single variable, like a scientist would, that you’re “winging it”. It doesn’t, nor should it, need to be that way.

The entire muscle building process is far to slow and long for people to be jotting down every tempo, rest period they use; or calorie they consume. If anything I think this is the reason why people make such little progress; because they put in so much mental effort outside of the gym that when the results don’t come pouring in that they think the program sucked - and they switch to another one promising big gains. In other words they don’t feel like they are getting a decent return on time/energy invested. In reality the program/diet may have been fine but they just didn’t relax, work it, and let the time go by to show the results.

All this to say that if you’re going about this like a “responsibility” instead of a “passion” you’ll short change yourself in the results department and probably not be in for the long haul.

72

[quote]TRAJJ wrote:

Something else needs to be addressed, and that is a persons definition of ‘body building’. This isn’t something that has a wrong answer. Body building is just that, building the body.
[/quote]

Bullshit.

Otherwise, my next door neighbour, who walks her dog in the evenings for the exercise (that is, to build her body) is a bodybuilder. That means that any dick that farts around in a gym (moves weights = building the body) is a bodybuilder.

For a definition to have meaning it must be exclusive – that is, the more exclusive the definition, the more valuable it is.

So re the term “bodybuilding” or “bodybuilder” we could water it down so it means everything and everybody that lifts a weight and therefore absolutely nothing (your definition) or we could raise the bar a little.

What is this retarded notion that something dealing with weight-training must fall into only two catagories: either related to training for a specific sport or bodybuilding??? That is just dumb. Its like suggesting that everyone that drives a car is either a F1 or a NASCAR racer.

73

[quote]Scotacus wrote:
TRAJJ wrote:

Something else needs to be addressed, and that is a persons definition of ‘body building’. This isn’t something that has a wrong answer. Body building is just that, building the body.

Bullshit.

Otherwise, my next door neighbour, who walks her dog in the evenings for the exercise (that is, to build her body) is a bodybuilder. That means that any dick that farts around in a gym (moves weights = building the body) is a bodybuilder.

For a definition to have meaning it must be exclusive – that is, the more exclusive the definition, the more valuable it is.

So re the term “bodybuilding” or “bodybuilder” we could water it down so it means everything and everybody that lifts a weight and therefore absolutely nothing (your definition) or we could raise the bar a little.

What is this retarded notion that something dealing with weight-training must fall into only two catagories: either related to training for a specific sport or bodybuilding??? That is just dumb. Its like suggesting that everyone that drives a car is either a F1 or a NASCAR racer.[/quote]

Scotacus,

I gotta tell ya, you’re a prissy little bitch when you’re on your period.

Your examples are a joke. If you want to have a one-dimensional definition of BB, go for it. But the FACT is that the definition of BB that some here try to say has been around for a hundred years is incorrect. Go back to Bono, Sandow and a whole host of those who came before us. The had muscle mass, though generally not what the drugged up mutant of today had. BUT alot of them were a HELL of a stronger. And alot of them were in better overall shape. Not all, but many of these guys were a complete BB package. Size, strength, endurance, vitality, power, speed and the list goes on. So to ME, your definition has been the one watered down over the last few decades.

I see these ass clowns with thighs so damn big they have to put a kotex and vasaline in between them so they don’t burst into flames when they walk. You may or may not think thats ‘jacked’ but I think its ludicrous. And uh yeah…I’ll use the word NON-FUNCTIONAL. Screw it if you and others don’t like it.

If you can bench 500 hundred but can’t go past 3 on a pyramid, in MY book you’re not a complete BBer. If it works for you, great. Doesn’t do anything for me and my goals.

So hang on with both hands to your definition if it works for you. But it isn’t a ONE SIZE FITS ALL world. And if I want to use a BETTER, more COMPLETE definition for BB…guess what? I do. And I’ll use it as long as it works whether it short dicks every cannibal on the Congo and pisses off all the ‘I just wanna get HUUUUUGE’ guys here on the board.

Unless the mod puts a specific definition on the title of the board and enforces that it and ONLY it can be used…you’re outta gas.

Be safe and make good choices.

74

[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
Boris Kleine does use HST but he does use a split if I recall correctly. Bryan Haycock once had a posting on his site of Boris’s training schedule. It had high frequency but was still not a TBT routine.

The title of this thread is “What Program Worked Best For YOU”. I guess the words “working best” refer to what worked best for reaching your PERSONAL GOALS. Obviously not everyone wants to look, train, and live like a bodybuilder as people have different priorities in life. I have personally made bodybuilding a top priority. I do not consider it a sacrfice because quite honestly, I think I might be a boring guy otherwise. I do not own a TV, nor do I give a shit about the pop culture trash that is featured on TV. I honestly do not give a shit about politics. I do not drink excessively, nor do I give a rat’s ass about bars and clubs. I do not plan on getting married for another 7 years at least! So, I do not have anchors that intefere with my progressing in bodybuilding. I guess I am a bit self absorbed, like most serious BBers, recreational or otherwise.

Therefore, I can adopt split routines and any other lifestyle practice that a bodybuilder does, aside from sitting on my ass and not having a career, a luxury SOME men on this earth have because of a sponsor. I plan on entering my first natural show next year. This is my goal, to participate in bodybuilding. I do not have elite genetics, nor do I have shit genetics.I would say on a scale of 1 - 10, I rank 7 in terms of genetics. Above average, but definitely not the best.
All I am saying here is that one should find what works best for THEIR goals. If one wants to gain SOME muscle and have decent fitness levels, go for TBT or upper/lower split routine. If you succeed, great!

Those who want to get jacked as possible, use a TBT and adopt the right lifestyle.
BUT…when discussing what is best for gaining as much mass as possible, it is clear that a split routine is best, regardless of what people’s personal goals are. AGAIN, this is simply because the most muscular men on this earth have gotten to where they are with split routines hundreds, if not thousands, of times over! If TBT did produce more muscle than split routines 1000s OF TIMES OVER, I am CERTAIN that today’s top bodybuilders would adopt this form of training.
Yes, I remember AC discussing that topic. I know he does use MOVEMENT based splits. What I meant was that he is not fond of BODYPART splits because of the inherent flaws in them. All programs have flaws and he would agree with this as well. I do think bodypart splits are not as balanced as a movement based split in terms of balancing muscle tension and strength in specific planes of motion. However, there is risk in some endeavors and I guess bodybuilding does bring some risk with it.

I have benefited from the writings of non BB guys like EC and AC tremendously and have incorporated some of their principles into my bodypart splits to a degree, especially with flexibility, mobility, and warming up and paying some attention to balance within a program.
But I DO get tired of the sneers and jokes aimed at bodybuilders when it happens over and over and over again. Like:
-Bodybuilders are not strong for their size; they are all show and no go.

-Bodyuilding training is dysfunctional. Again, I thought for something to be functional it had to serve a purpose. Bodybuilding training has a purpose, to get jacked!
-Bodybuilders do not “compete.” OK, we get it, maybe its more of a show/exhibition than a competition.

-"Do not listen to those guys at the gym that are all jacked. They are all on 'roids and all they say is to eat more protein. You do not need to eat all that protein. A lot of dietitians say this shit. I happen to be a dietitian myself and am finishing a master degree in nutrition. However, some bodybuilders could teach some RDs how to lose some weight in a hurry, rather than follow their silly pyramid, high carb, low protein diets, while fearing that anynone who ingests more than 30 g of pro in a sitting is going to drop dead of end stage renal disease. Many bodybuilders do not know what the fuck they are talking about, even some advanced ones, and couldn’t nutritionally advise or train someone if their life depended on it. However, some are very intelligent and know their shit very well, training, nutrition, and otherwise. The IFBB pro Colette Nelson happens to be a dietitian. Lonnie Lowery is one. Loads of other BBers without degrees in nutrition know some stuff too.

-Big biceps, pecs, and quads are “useless”. I do not know about this one. Perhaps HUGE quads, bis, and pecs are not necessary for athletic feats, but these muscles do contract in physical performance and some athletes do need mass in these areas, particularly strongman events and powerlifting.

Whatever. With all this ranting, at the end of the day, it all matters what kind of results you want and if you succeed in getting them and whether you actually LIKE and ENJOY what you are doing. When I was younger, I would experiment with some of these cookie cutter routines here on T-mag and training became an utter nightmare! Counting rest periods, reps, tempos, and rest intervals, trying to hog two to three pieces of equipent for agonist/antagonist or some other pairings, and then record all of this data. My hobby turned miserable and I thought that this was the way to go and the other stuff in “Muscle and Fiction”, as all these strength geeks like to call it, was just junk. I returned to more simple split routines, probably some that even resembled what came out of the muscle rags and the gains came along again. I was HAPPY as well!

Meanwhile, I realized that I did learn a lot of things from the muscle mags like Musclemag International (Ron Harris, Will Brink, Greg Zulak were some good authors), Muscle Media when it was good, Iron Man (best newsstand mag in my opinion, has some really good shit, especially when Duchaine wrote for it), and yes, even Flex and M&F! Natural Bodybuilding magazine is eh/OK too SOMETIMES. One should keep in mind that the authors of these magazines might not be the most cerebral strength coaches but they have studied and practiced bodybuilding for DECADES! That says something! That’s not “FICTION” to them! [/quote]

I’ve been reading some of your posts and you sound very knowledgeable. Great read.

75

[quote]Der Candy wrote:
Bricknyce wrote:
Boris Kleine does use HST but he does use a split if I recall correctly. Bryan Haycock once had a posting on his site of Boris’s training schedule. It had high frequency but was still not a TBT routine.

The title of this thread is “What Program Worked Best For YOU”. I guess the words “working best” refer to what worked best for reaching your PERSONAL GOALS. Obviously not everyone wants to look, train, and live like a bodybuilder as people have different priorities in life. I have personally made bodybuilding a top priority. I do not consider it a sacrfice because quite honestly, I think I might be a boring guy otherwise. I do not own a TV, nor do I give a shit about the pop culture trash that is featured on TV. I honestly do not give a shit about politics. I do not drink excessively, nor do I give a rat’s ass about bars and clubs. I do not plan on getting married for another 7 years at least! So, I do not have anchors that intefere with my progressing in bodybuilding. I guess I am a bit self absorbed, like most serious BBers, recreational or otherwise.

Therefore, I can adopt split routines and any other lifestyle practice that a bodybuilder does, aside from sitting on my ass and not having a career, a luxury SOME men on this earth have because of a sponsor. I plan on entering my first natural show next year. This is my goal, to participate in bodybuilding. I do not have elite genetics, nor do I have shit genetics.I would say on a scale of 1 - 10, I rank 7 in terms of genetics. Above average, but definitely not the best.
All I am saying here is that one should find what works best for THEIR goals. If one wants to gain SOME muscle and have decent fitness levels, go for TBT or upper/lower split routine. If you succeed, great!

Those who want to get jacked as possible, use a TBT and adopt the right lifestyle.
BUT…when discussing what is best for gaining as much mass as possible, it is clear that a split routine is best, regardless of what people’s personal goals are. AGAIN, this is simply because the most muscular men on this earth have gotten to where they are with split routines hundreds, if not thousands, of times over! If TBT did produce more muscle than split routines 1000s OF TIMES OVER, I am CERTAIN that today’s top bodybuilders would adopt this form of training.
Yes, I remember AC discussing that topic. I know he does use MOVEMENT based splits. What I meant was that he is not fond of BODYPART splits because of the inherent flaws in them. All programs have flaws and he would agree with this as well. I do think bodypart splits are not as balanced as a movement based split in terms of balancing muscle tension and strength in specific planes of motion. However, there is risk in some endeavors and I guess bodybuilding does bring some risk with it.

I have benefited from the writings of non BB guys like EC and AC tremendously and have incorporated some of their principles into my bodypart splits to a degree, especially with flexibility, mobility, and warming up and paying some attention to balance within a program.
But I DO get tired of the sneers and jokes aimed at bodybuilders when it happens over and over and over again. Like:
-Bodybuilders are not strong for their size; they are all show and no go.

-Bodyuilding training is dysfunctional. Again, I thought for something to be functional it had to serve a purpose. Bodybuilding training has a purpose, to get jacked!
-Bodybuilders do not “compete.” OK, we get it, maybe its more of a show/exhibition than a competition.

-"Do not listen to those guys at the gym that are all jacked. They are all on 'roids and all they say is to eat more protein. You do not need to eat all that protein. A lot of dietitians say this shit. I happen to be a dietitian myself and am finishing a master degree in nutrition. However, some bodybuilders could teach some RDs how to lose some weight in a hurry, rather than follow their silly pyramid, high carb, low protein diets, while fearing that anynone who ingests more than 30 g of pro in a sitting is going to drop dead of end stage renal disease. Many bodybuilders do not know what the fuck they are talking about, even some advanced ones, and couldn’t nutritionally advise or train someone if their life depended on it. However, some are very intelligent and know their shit very well, training, nutrition, and otherwise. The IFBB pro Colette Nelson happens to be a dietitian. Lonnie Lowery is one. Loads of other BBers without degrees in nutrition know some stuff too.

-Big biceps, pecs, and quads are “useless”. I do not know about this one. Perhaps HUGE quads, bis, and pecs are not necessary for athletic feats, but these muscles do contract in physical performance and some athletes do need mass in these areas, particularly strongman events and powerlifting.

Whatever. With all this ranting, at the end of the day, it all matters what kind of results you want and if you succeed in getting them and whether you actually LIKE and ENJOY what you are doing. When I was younger, I would experiment with some of these cookie cutter routines here on T-mag and training became an utter nightmare! Counting rest periods, reps, tempos, and rest intervals, trying to hog two to three pieces of equipent for agonist/antagonist or some other pairings, and then record all of this data. My hobby turned miserable and I thought that this was the way to go and the other stuff in “Muscle and Fiction”, as all these strength geeks like to call it, was just junk. I returned to more simple split routines, probably some that even resembled what came out of the muscle rags and the gains came along again. I was HAPPY as well!

Meanwhile, I realized that I did learn a lot of things from the muscle mags like Musclemag International (Ron Harris, Will Brink, Greg Zulak were some good authors), Muscle Media when it was good, Iron Man (best newsstand mag in my opinion, has some really good shit, especially when Duchaine wrote for it), and yes, even Flex and M&F! Natural Bodybuilding magazine is eh/OK too SOMETIMES. One should keep in mind that the authors of these magazines might not be the most cerebral strength coaches but they have studied and practiced bodybuilding for DECADES! That says something! That’s not “FICTION” to them!

I’ve been reading some of your posts and you sound very knowledgeable. Great read.[/quote]

Agreed. Very good post.

76

[quote]TRAJJ wrote:
<<< Go back to Bono, Sandow and a whole host of those who came before us. The had muscle mass, though generally not what the drugged up mutant of today had. >>>[/quote]

Bodybuilders of all ages were clearly recognized as such by everybody. Bodybuilding has always meant pushing the limits and the limits have been redefined in different eras based on progressing knowledge and yes drugs.

Someone with bodybuilding goals reaches for the limits of their individual potential in terms of size first with strength being the primary tool used along the way. Somebody is going to jump back with [quote]“yeah but, yeah but, bodybuilders in the past were looking for symmetry and the total package not just making EVERY muscle as big as they possibly could”.[/quote]

Fine, when somebody actually reaches the level where they have to worry about ANY muscle group being too large please let me know. I’ll be waiting with baited breath. Everybody has LAGGING groups somewhere, but all those with a group you’re worried is getting too big raise your hand now. That’s what I thought.

Bodybuilding doesn’t have to be confined to the IFBB stage, and drugs do not define bodybuilding as far as I’m concerned, but it is about physical achievement at the top of one’s potential, not some standard of “this is the shape I should be in if I just take care of myself”.

77

[quote]jaygarry wrote:
I have currently been working out to my own homemade routine and it basically sucks. I am looking for a new routine for improvement in strength as well as overall bulk. I know there are a million routines posted on the site and i was thinking about doing CT’s hss-100 but was wondering which programs have worked the best for you[/quote]

2 Days per week, focusing on the Bench & the Squat:

Monday: Rep Day

  1. Bench Press: 8-10 sets, working up to heavy partials in the rack at 40 reps each set.

  2. Row: 2x8

  3. Behind The Neck Press: 2x7

  4. Squat: 1x20 (add 10 pounds each week, or as much as you can)

Thursday: Heavy Day

  1. Bench Pres: Work up to your heaviest single, taking 6-8 sets to get there, then drop 20 pounds and hammer as manny as you can, drop another 20 pounds and rep out, drop another 20 pounds and rep out. You are done here.

  2. Row: Work up to your heaviest single.

  3. Behind The Neck Press: Work up to your heaviest single.

  4. Squat: Work up to your heaviest single (CAREFULLY & SLOWLY)

78

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
TRAJJ wrote:
<<< Go back to Bono, Sandow and a whole host of those who came before us. The had muscle mass, though generally not what the drugged up mutant of today had. >>>

Bodybuilders of all ages were clearly recognized as such by everybody. Bodybuilding has always meant pushing the limits and the limits have been redefined in different eras based on progressing knowledge and yes drugs.

Someone with bodybuilding goals reaches for the limits of their individual potential in terms of size first with strength being the primary tool used along the way. Somebody is going to jump back with “yeah but, yeah but, bodybuilders in the past were looking for symmetry and the total package not just making EVERY muscle as big as they possibly could”.

Fine, when somebody actually reaches the level where they have to worry about ANY muscle group being too large please let me know. I’ll be waiting with baited breath. Everybody has LAGGING groups somewhere, but all those with a group you’re worried is getting too big raise your hand now. That’s what I thought.

Bodybuilding doesn’t have to be confined to the IFBB stage, and drugs do not define bodybuilding as far as I’m concerned, but it is about physical achievement at the top of one’s potential, not some standard of “this is the shape I should be in if I just take care of myself”. [/quote]

Agreed. Sandow was a FREAK in his era. He might as well have been Ronnie Coleman to everyone who saw him. It makes no sense to judge bodybuilders from 100 years ago by today’s standards. Judge them by the era in which they lived and most will soon see they weren’t much different from bodybuilders today.

79

Who brought in IFBB?? Who said anything about having to be monstrous. You see, this is what happens when people cant make an argument (you apparently have hysteria in your family profile FJJ, Id get that checked out if I were you) – they go to extremes.

Yes yes… thats what i meant - unless you are the size of a ronnie coleman you arent a bodybuilder etc etc…

Again. Bullshit.

A friend of mine was (now retired) a pro running back. He is the biggest guy Ive personally known. But even he never called himself a bodybuilder. Did he build his body? Obviously. Huh! So, why not say he is a bodybuilder? Hmmm. (theme song from Jeopardy!) doo doo doo doo doo doo doo, doo doo doo doo DOO doodoodoodoodoo…

There is no weight or height restriction or measurement standard perhaps for one to call themselves a bodybuilder and not be a silly little peckerwood. But anyone with any self-respect would not be in such a mad rush to refer to himself as a bodybuilder, unless his world is very small and he thinks everything he does is very special.

My own experience – I work out hard, am in the best shape of my life, am putting on muscle and building strength no doubt. I would not refer to myself as a bodybuilder. Give me a few more years, say 30-40 lbs of muscle mass and, without any exaggeration, I would say maybe then, just maybe, I could say to others I am an aspiring bodybuilder. Why is this?

Because, FJJ, my standard is higher than yours, and therefore not as easy to reach as yours, you bodybuilder you.

80

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
TRAJJ wrote:
<<< Go back to Bono, Sandow and a whole host of those who came before us. The had muscle mass, though generally not what the drugged up mutant of today had. >>>

Bodybuilders of all ages were clearly recognized as such by everybody. Bodybuilding has always meant pushing the limits and the limits have been redefined in different eras based on progressing knowledge and yes drugs.

Someone with bodybuilding goals reaches for the limits of their individual potential in terms of size first with strength being the primary tool used along the way. Somebody is going to jump back with “yeah but, yeah but, bodybuilders in the past were looking for symmetry and the total package not just making EVERY muscle as big as they possibly could”.

Fine, when somebody actually reaches the level where they have to worry about ANY muscle group being too large please let me know. I’ll be waiting with baited breath. Everybody has LAGGING groups somewhere, but all those with a group you’re worried is getting too big raise your hand now. That’s what I thought.

Bodybuilding doesn’t have to be confined to the IFBB stage, and drugs do not define bodybuilding as far as I’m concerned, but it is about physical achievement at the top of one’s potential, not some standard of “this is the shape I should be in if I just take care of myself”. [/quote]

Exactly, though I would add assuming one has some potential, and that potential definitely shows it is being achieved.