training each body part once a week vs. two

I think men should be hitting groups at least twice a week and women at least 3 times. According to Charles Poliquin women should train more frequently because they don't have the T to handle the volume of men and they also don't have the T to hang onto gains for as long as men.

5'6" 125/ Bench: 115 / Front squat: 90 / Deadlift: 205 / Pullups: 10

Follow me! www.twitter.com/bobbigoes

See I disagree, take your very same logic about time/work/school or whatever and you can easy apply that to full body.

full bodys are typically 3 days, some 4. Pretty easy to also remember squat/bench/row/OH press for example. splits can also be 3 days but go anywhere from 3-6. So its not really any kind of advantage.

As far as the vast majority of people on and off this board following a split. I think it has to do with society, and obviously the muscle mags. The pro's train like that because they can, they need to. Normal people say "gosh if I wanna look like that I need to follow this routine". People think that Splits are they way to go because thats what they see and learn.

Regardless of whether you do a split variation or a full body, I think more importantly is your diet. But given the results from myself, others and the science behind it...I very much back the fullbody

ORIGINAL: deadlysuperstar

ORIGINAL: smoundzou

OK.. so I have a question for anyone who cares to answer.

If everyone agrees it only takes 48-72 hours for the muscle to recover, what is the point in allowing the muscles to go un-worked for another 96 hours?

If you're training for general health, I understand but if you're training for Hypertrophy or strength, it makes absolutely no sense what so ever...

Please elaborate and enlighten me on this methodology where a muscle is only worked 1 X per week and explain the benefits of it.. In more detail, explain what's going on with the muscles in those 96 hours it's doing nothing and explain how that is a functional way to train.. Details please..

A lot of people on this board go to school and/or have a day job, so setting up a split based on the work week makes the regimen easier to remember, easier to fit into a weekly schedule, and there's always time off during the week for homework and/or R&R.

That's why I think people do 3-4 day splits built into a weekly schedule.

Optimally, everyone's workout should look more like a pro's workout (not meaning EXACTLY like a pro BBers workout), where 2 of the 4-day split workouts get hit 2X per week because it's not based on the weekly calendar, but on a 6-day on, 1-day off schedule.

Other people might see things differently, but from what I've observed on this board, that's why.

current 5rm On the texas method
Squat:325
Deadlift:365
Bench:255
My lifting journal

http://strengthmill.net/forum/showthread.php?s=38c084ec0455b629ed0f09e4af40aeaf&t=2407&page=8

I'm not going to even engage you on the fullbody routines being garbage simply cause that's not the topic of this discussion...

But I also disagree with your reasoning for so many doing 3-4 day splits... I've seen very few people give those reasons you mentioned.... Most lead of with the old you should only hit a muscle 1 X weekly.. at least that's the reasoning I've seen.. IMO, the only reason they say that is because they've been reading the muscle comics that so often say if you train your muscles more than 1 X weekly, you won't grow... which is one of the most stupid, unfounded statements I've ever heard...

What I was asking is for someone to list some support evidence that training a muscle more than 1 X per week is detrimental to growth or strength.. and so far, no one has been able to come up with any reasonable documented proof or even hear say for that matter..

I will say if you did a full body workout with me, I guarantee you by the time we finished, I would be handing you a puke bucket and carrying your big 280lbs ass to the car.....

Maybe in the past you've done fullbody routines that sucked and lacked intensity.. and if you're game.. I'll be glad to give you a fullbody full of compounds and isolations that will literally bleed the purple from your hair it's so intense.. Do the routine as I suggest for 1 or 2 weeks and tell me it's for little girls... are you up for it?  if so, I'll be more than happy to pm it to you..
 
Edit:  I just noticed your comment about Not being natural and if that is indeed the case then I fully understand why a fullbody routine might not be suitable for you.. But please keep in mind when giving advice to 15,16 and even 20-something year old lifters here THAT ARE NATURAL.. your particular training method is nothing more than a big car wreck waiting to happen for them.... So why not do the right thing and try to give appropriate advice?  Telling some 17 year old kid who hardly even knows what creatine is, he should be hitting iron like you do is insane...

ORIGINAL: deadlysuperstar

ORIGINAL: Nm0ney34

See I disagree, take your very same logic about time/work/school or whatever and you can easy apply that to full body.

full bodys are typically 3 days, some 4. Pretty easy to also remember squat/bench/row/OH press for example. splits can also be 3 days but go anywhere from 3-6. So its not really any kind of advantage.

As far as the vast majority of people on and off this board following a split. I think it has to do with society, and obviously the muscle mags. The pro's train like that because they can, they need to. Normal people say "gosh if I wanna look like that I need to follow this routine". People think that Splits are they way to go because thats what they see and learn.

Regardless of whether you do a split variation or a full body, I think more importantly is your diet. But given the results from myself, others and the science behind it...I very much back the fullbody

Full body workouts are garbage IMO.

If they work for you and you get results, that's excellent. Keep on it. I'd be swimming in place if I did such a repetitively low impact workout.

Nobody is gonna be able to hit a full body workout and do the damage I do to my body without going catabolic before the workout is finished. I also lift and eat closer to what pro BBers do (because I have to), plus I'm not "natural", so that's what works for me.

I agree with you on the diet part, and I also agree that if you are content with the results you get from a full body workout, the science behind it, and the results you see from others, then that should be the workout you should run with and leave split workouts out of your regimen.

There is never enough time to do everything, but there is always enough time to do the most important thing

 

no point in trying to reason with deadly...

He really takes tha meathead bodybuilder thing to a new level.

18 yo
6'0" 208 lbs.
bulking

deadly why would you think you wouldnt get sufficient volume? if you do 9 sets for a muscle, for example, you would just do 3 each workout 3x a week. same volume and you could hit the muscle harder in the sets after 3 because they wouldnt already be worn out.

plus i dont know why you would say training 2x a week or more is likely to cause overtraining. that depends on the intensity and volume 

i hit my muscles twice a week, and lagging muscles three times a week
 
upper chest has always been lagging for me, so i hit chest 3x a week, starting with incline barbell, then incline dumbell, then flat bench, then cable crossovers..
 
id say 12-15 sets per workout for chest, i was also all over the place with weight/rep selection, some days id go heavy, some days in the 8-12 range, some days include both
 
worked really well for me, im guessing i really shocked the muscle, cuz after a few workouts my upper chest started to fill in good
 
i think once you really get into lifting and no longer are a beginner, your muscles recover alot faster allowing you to work them more frequently due to how the body adapts to the stimulus...
 
when i 1st starterd lifting, i would be sore for almost a week...now it barely lasts a day...
 
why work a muscle only 4 times a month anyway

ORIGINAL: jonb112303

i hit my muscles twice a week, and lagging muscles three times a week

upper chest has always been lagging for me, so i hit chest 3x a week, starting with incline barbell, then incline dumbell, then flat bench, then cable crossovers..

id say 12-15 sets per workout for chest, i was also all over the place with weight/rep selection, some days id go heavy, some days in the 8-12 range, some days include both

worked really well for me, im guessing i really shocked the muscle, cuz after a few workouts my upper chest started to fill in good

i think once you really get into lifting and no longer are a beginner, your muscles recover alot faster allowing you to work them more frequently due to how the body adapts to the stimulus...

when i 1st starterd lifting, i would be sore for almost a week...now it barely lasts a day...

why work a muscle only 4 times a month anyway

thats pretty much the exact opposite of what happens. as you get more experienced you induce more trauma to grow and need more recovery in most cases.

and are you doing 12-15 sets for chest 3x a week so 36-45 sets a week??


smoundzou: if your actually interested in an answer i would go to t-nation. you'd get a lot more reasoning there as to the reasons for it, ask christian thibaudeau himself if you want

uhhh, which 17 year old kid are you talking about?

ORIGINAL: smoundzou

I'm not going to even engage you on the fullbody routines being garbage simply cause that's not the topic of this discussion...

But I also disagree with your reasoning for so many doing 3-4 day splits... I've seen very few people give those reasons you mentioned.... Most lead of with the old you should only hit a muscle 1 X weekly.. at least that's the reasoning I've seen.. IMO, the only reason they say that is because they've been reading the muscle comics that so often say if you train your muscles more than 1 X weekly, you won't grow... which is one of the most stupid, unfounded statements I've ever heard...

What I was asking is for someone to list some support evidence that training a muscle more than 1 X per week is detrimental to growth or strength.. and so far, no one has been able to come up with any reasonable documented proof or even hear say for that matter..

I will say if you did a full body workout with me, I guarantee you by the time we finished, I would be handing you a puke bucket and carrying your big 280lbs ass to the car.....

Maybe in the past you've done fullbody routines that sucked and lacked intensity.. and if you're game.. I'll be glad to give you a fullbody full of compounds and isolations that will literally bleed the purple from your hair it's so intense.. Do the routine as I suggest for 1 or 2 weeks and tell me it's for little girls... are you up for it?  if so, I'll be more than happy to pm it to you..

Edit:  I just noticed your comment about Not being natural and if that is indeed the case then I fully understand why a fullbody routine might not be suitable for you.. But please keep in mind when giving advice to 15,16 and even 20-something year old lifters here THAT ARE NATURAL.. your particular training method is nothing more than a big car wreck waiting to happen for them.... So why not do the right thing and try to give appropriate advice?  Telling some 17 year old kid who hardly even knows what creatine is, he should be hitting iron like you do is insane...

ORIGINAL: deadlysuperstar

ORIGINAL: Nm0ney34

See I disagree, take your very same logic about time/work/school or whatever and you can easy apply that to full body.

full bodys are typically 3 days, some 4. Pretty easy to also remember squat/bench/row/OH press for example. splits can also be 3 days but go anywhere from 3-6. So its not really any kind of advantage.

As far as the vast majority of people on and off this board following a split. I think it has to do with society, and obviously the muscle mags. The pro's train like that because they can, they need to. Normal people say "gosh if I wanna look like that I need to follow this routine". People think that Splits are they way to go because thats what they see and learn.

Regardless of whether you do a split variation or a full body, I think more importantly is your diet. But given the results from myself, others and the science behind it...I very much back the fullbody

Full body workouts are garbage IMO.

If they work for you and you get results, that's excellent. Keep on it. I'd be swimming in place if I did such a repetitively low impact workout.

Nobody is gonna be able to hit a full body workout and do the damage I do to my body without going catabolic before the workout is finished. I also lift and eat closer to what pro BBers do (because I have to), plus I'm not "natural", so that's what works for me.

I agree with you on the diet part, and I also agree that if you are content with the results you get from a full body workout, the science behind it, and the results you see from others, then that should be the workout you should run with and leave split workouts out of your regimen.

i disagree..i believe it depends on the person
 
and yes, 36-45 sets a week, it has worked for me so far

David.. That's not necessary.. I know most of the reasons why those who advocate hitting muscles 1 X weekly and I've never actually read anything that backs up the logic or reasoning behind it, speaking for those who train naturally.
 
If someone is juicing up, doing a 1 muscle per day workout might work for them depending on how advanced they are.. Just because someone is using steroids doesn't mean they're at a level where they even need it.. Most who use them start prematurely and never reach their natural training potential which is a shame...
 
Again, depending on the level of development of a steroid user will determine if he actually will benifit from doing a 1 muscle per week type routine.. Few are at that level.. at least IMO...
 
 

There is never enough time to do everything, but there is always enough time to do the most important thing

 

ORIGINAL: boomersooner1331

uhhh, which 17 year old kid are you talking about?

He probably just meant it as an example. I don't think he would point out anyone in particular like that.

Lifts: Bench-285, ATG Squat-485, Deadlift-495

 The most muscle growth comes from working out when your muscles are 80-95% recovered.  It makes micro trauma easier to obtain because the cells aren't fully healed yet (what's easier, breaking a brand new 2x4, or breaking a 2x4 with a crack down the middle).

Take a look at Bill Star's routine.  The first workout is 5x5, mainly to break open the cells and help strengthen the CNS.  The second workout is 5x4, so you can recover to almost full before the third, and heaviest workout.  The third one is 5x4 1x3 1x8.  Then you have two days to recover from that, to do it all over again.

President of the Emancipation Detoxification. DBB's oldest forum group, punching baby seals since 2/12/08

you are correct.  I was speaking in general and wouldn't specifically point out any individual.
 
I was more less referring to people who come to this site that have no understanding of working out or supplements.. which is usually someone male and in their teens.
 
 
No offense to anyone.
 

ORIGINAL: Leg_Beast

ORIGINAL: boomersooner1331

uhhh, which 17 year old kid are you talking about?

He probably just meant it as an example. I don't think he would point out anyone in particular like that.

There is never enough time to do everything, but there is always enough time to do the most important thing

 

smoundzou, a muscle can be trained within a 48-72 hour period and not have much detrimental effect.
 
However
 
A.Would you get a new lifter to do this?
 
I remember when i was new, and with the most shytest of workouts that involved simple curls and bench my entire body felt like it was hit by a truck for about 1 1/2 weeks, i could hardly move.
 
I agree with you that working muscle groups more than once per week is great, i just dont think its a good idea for anyone new into lifting until there body becomes more adapted to dealing with that kind of damage.
 
B.While a muscle can be hit again and still grow bigger the next time, there is a factor of metabolites which could bottleneck, certain other compounds might be detrimental or put unneeded stress on the body, a full 7 day recovery as they say is this, how the body flushes out all the metabolites and excess it used for the repair, if you dont give your body the needed time it could bottleneck, especially if youre a newb.
 
Overall though i agree with you, however hitting the muscles 100% 2 times or 3 times a week is something only roiders could do effectively.
 
When doing full body routines i personally find it best to do most sets to a 60-80% level, there is no point making 100% damage if the muscle can grow with 60% damage x 3 during the week.
 
Nobody can workout 180%, but do 3 days of 60%, you have the same microdamage.
 
 
 
 
What im about to post here ISNT ABSOLUTE, it is just a SUBJECTIVE experience
 
My biggest weight and strength gains has come about from doing a HST derivative/hybrid.
I find my results are better when my muscles are stressed more frequently.
 
However i find this to be possibly genetic, as ive seen split workers gain lots of muscle (albeit no way of saying whether theyre on anything) and seen full body workouts go to pot.
 
Ive also seen the opposite.
 
 
 
 

twisted he's not talking about going all out on volume and tearing the muscle apart, just doing something like 3 sets per muscle group progressively adding weight each workout which would be fine for pretty much any level


Deadly: you using test basically makes the argument of your workout pointless. idk if your only trying to prove this point for you but smoundzou and i were referring to natural trainees.
if more than 3x a week was overtraining you'd sure have a hell of a lot of people overtrained. i've seen plently of people hit a muscle 3+ times a week and be fine so idk where you would get that from.
as far as my avatar, stop trying to start ****...it's just an avatar