Training every Muscle once a Week

[Duality]

Quit posting the jerkoff smiley to attack members. /warn

If you don't even know the very basics of muscle cells, what makes you think you have anything to offer in this discussion?

You keep making random claims without backing them either with arguments or facts. Being a personal trainer is NOT a token of physiological knowledge.

you yourself have refuted absolutely nothing and appear to be against what i'm saying without really arguing any kind of point. i really don't even know if your for or against full body workouts (i'm assuming your a fan), if you practice them yourself, or really why you disagree so vehemently with my point of view on them?? because you have made NO arguement for their case. whereas i am at least elaborating on why i feel the way i do.

oh and don't act self righteous and think your little remark about me "knowing everything about training" is ANY less aggressive and insulting than me "attacking" you with the smiley

 

[Tunen]

you yourself have refuted absolutely nothing and appear to be against what i'm saying without really arguing any kind of point. i really don't even know if your for or against full body workouts (i'm assuming your a fan), if you practice them yourself, or really why you disagree so vehemently with my point of view on them?? because you have made NO arguement for their case. whereas i am at least elaborating on why i feel the way i do.

Actually I have. I pointed out muscle-recuperation time as a point. It makes perfect sense to train a bodypart every 48 hours. This is an argument. I'm neither with or against you. I just don't think you should be posting like you know it all when you obviously don't. That you don't even make an effort at arguing your points further erodes your credibility and devalues your posts.

oh and don't act self righteous and think your little remark about me "knowing everything about training" is ANY less aggressive and insulting than me "attacking" you with the smiley

Use your words

 

[Rocky]

FB training is just as valid as any other method, and more so. Saying that FB training is for "beachbody" types is ridiculous being that it is "whole body" as opposed to the arms and pecs which is assocaited with beach body trainers.
The benefits of FB are the opportunity for increased frequency which is generally more beneficial for consistent improvement than intensity alone, along with the fact you can focus more on core copound movements (hence not requiring 4hrs in the gym) which will promote much better response both in muscle and natural GH production. A combination of the two would be optimum.

 

[Duality]

Actually I have. I pointed out muscle-recuperation time as a point. It makes perfect sense to train a bodypart every 48 hours. This is an argument. I'm neither with or against you. I just don't think you should be posting like you know it all when you obviously don't. That you don't even make an effort at arguing your points further erodes your credibility and devalues your posts.


Use your words

it makes sense to train something every 48 hours? i am very much a subscriber of the HIT philosophy so it is very hard for me to invision someone training with a intensity so low that they can hit the same muscle group within 2 days time. this way of training would make dorian yates and mike mentzer cringe

and me "knowing it all" and me being opposed to FB training are two very different things. my posts and thoughts on the matter come from someone who has tried both FB and my current regime, and while it worked for me in the beginning, i quickly plateued and had to take the next step into what i consider big boy training (hey if you like FB trianing cool...but i've never met nor heard of a bber who trains that way, and i'm under the impression that most people in this forum are bodybuilders) properly training for strength and size has always meant to me to be busting your ass on each muscle group once a week, then stepping back and allowing them to recover properly. i'm sorry you'll find no heavily researched docuements or scientific verbage in this "devalued" post of mine, seeing as how that must make it valid. but this is just what i see as common sense when it comes to training. but by no means am i all knowing and this is my opinion on the matter

 

[knight_rider]

it makes sense to train something every 48 hours? i am very much a subscriber of the HIT philosophy so it is very hard for me to invision someone training with a intensity so low that they can hit the same muscle group within 2 days time. this way of training would make dorian yates and mike mentzer cringe

and me "knowing it all" and me being opposed to FB training are two very different things. my posts and thoughts on the matter come from someone who has tried both FB and my current regime, and while it worked for me in the beginning, i quickly plateued and had to take the next step into what i consider big boy training (hey if you like FB trianing cool...but i've never met nor heard of a bber who trains that way, and i'm under the impression that most people in this forum are bodybuilders) properly training for strength and size has always meant to me to be busting your ass on each muscle group once a week, then stepping back and allowing them to recover properly. i'm sorry you'll find no heavily researched docuements or scientific verbage in this "devalued" post of mine, seeing as how that must make it valid. but this is just what i see as common sense when it comes to training. but by no means am i all knowing and this is my opinion on the matter

i think you will find for natural athletes, FB and upper/lower splits get great resutls, because they increase frequency, but reduce exercises and volume (usually) so that recovery is achievable, also the focus on big basic lifts increase Gh and test release! because when you perform the big mass builders all in one workout, instead of one mass builder and a few soft exercises the GH and test spike is significantly higher than in traditional split training!

also look at tunen and johnny bravos logs, some tough stuff going on in there!

i think you were a bit rude dismissing FB routines without having the knowledge and experience to make such a call............post some pics!

dont use pro's as examples of best practice they have both the best genetics and best drugs, so their recovery is super high!

naturals go better on FB and up/low splits! keep an open mind and get some manners!

 

[Rocky]

Using a pro routine as an example of how split training works is ridiculous.
And saying you plateued on an FB workout does not devalue it's merits. If you use any routine for too long you will reach a stage of stagnation.
I was always a subscriber of HIT training for many years in the style of Dorian et al and gave the exact same reasoning as you just did. Training with frequency does not mean using submaximal weights. If anything the emphasis is on the bigger exercises rather than in the manner of a split routine where you tend to employ several iso and supplemental exercises to fill out a session being that you do much less muscle groups per session.
I'm not saying that split routines don't have their place but to state that they are superior and are "big boy" training is very close-minded.

 

[Skeptic]

interesting. I personally dont like FB training. I dont usually have enough energy for the rest of the exercises after ive done say squats and bench. Upper/lower split, or different day/different bodypart for me

 

[Rocky]

Admittedly I veer towards the 2 split (UB/LB or some such) but it still employs the chance for more frequency than a 1 or 2 muscle a day split would generally allow.

 

[youngmusclejock]

Agree with you on that Rocky, I am going back to FB or UP/LB tomorrow..

 

[Duality]

i think you will find for natural athletes, FB and upper/lower splits get great resutls, because they increase frequency, but reduce exercises and volume (usually) so that recovery is achievable, also the focus on big basic lifts increase Gh and test release! because when you perform the big mass builders all in one workout, instead of one mass builder and a few soft exercises the GH and test spike is significantly higher than in traditional split training!

also look at tunen and johnny bravos logs, some tough stuff going on in there!

i think you were a bit rude dismissing FB routines without having the knowledge and experience to make such a call............post some pics!

dont use pro's as examples of best practice they have both the best genetics and best drugs, so their recovery is super high!

naturals go better on FB and up/low splits! keep an open mind and get some manners!

fair enough. i was a bit abrasive on dismissing them in my first couple posts (i was a little pissed off last night about some other things, maybe that had something to do with it? ) but i still strongly feel they don't allow for enough recovery nor enough intensity for an intermediate to advanced weightlifter. to me there just not something that a bodybuilder could really benefit from. rather more something a competitive athlete or just a guy looking to get a nice body would see results from.

and i wasn't trying to use mike mentzer and dorian yates as examples per say, they would probably grow from any type of training. more trying to say that i consider these two people very knowledgeable when it comes to topics such as this and i think they too would be in disagreeance with the full body routines for bodybuilders, that's all.

 

[knight_rider]

basically all that determines growth is progressive overload! As long as your getting stronger across a moderate rep range over time with good form and adequate nutrition, you will grow bigger more shapely muscles!

Plenty of guys on this site are achieving such progressions in strength with subsequent increases in mass!

some people find it easier to break it up and wait a week between muscles, some however like to decrease volume and exercise selection in favour of increased frequency, as long as intensity, volume and frequency are well balanced, recovery is possible.

often higher frequency leads to faster strength progressions and therfore hypertrophy!

im in favour of DC style training because i simply couldnt get a FB session done in time, but Up/ Lower splits with increased frequency have been certainly more effective than, one per week traditional splits!

its just a case of checks and balances!

but if your strength is always on the up and up with the big basics your on track in my book!

 

[Tunen]

but i still strongly feel they don't allow for enough recovery nor enough intensity for an intermediate to advanced weightlifter.

So please enlighten us on what your feeling is based on. What is "enough recovery" and "enough intensity" and what do you mean by the term "intensity"? You lay your words out to be the truth, argue by saying that you "feel" that FB routines don't work and make references to pro bodybuilders. Pretty much all the n00b-fails.

to me there just not something that a bodybuilder could really benefit from. rather more something a competitive athlete or just a guy looking to get a nice body would see results from.

Why do you say this It makes absolutely no sense. Why wouldn't a bodybuilder benefit from hypertrophy specific training? Scientifically, your 5-7 splits hold no water at all and are ineffective at best, compared to higher frequency cycled protocols.

and i wasn't trying to use mike mentzer and dorian yates as examples per say, they would probably grow from any type of training. more trying to say that i consider these two people very knowledgeable when it comes to topics such as this and i think they too would be in disagreeance with the full body routines for bodybuilders, that's all.

Knowledgeable??? So they've managed to con you with philosophical clichés have they? Very little of what they advocate is scientifically sustainable and even less actually derives from studies.

 

[PrinceVegeta]

Now that i have started doing more of a up/low system i feel stronger and fuller all the time...i seem to deflate and gain no muscle while waitng 6-5 days to train the muscle again.Plus its more fun to do diff excerises in one routine!just my 2 cents

 

[philosopher]

FB helped to get my strength up like no other routine did before, tho from a hypertrophy standpoint I would reccomand an UB/LB routine. That way there is more room for training your weak points while maintaining enough frequency to grow.

 

[Duality]

So please enlighten us on what your feeling is based on. What is "enough recovery" and "enough intensity" and what do you mean by the term "intensity"? You lay your words out to be the truth, argue by saying that you "feel" that FB routines don't work and make references to pro bodybuilders. Pretty much all the n00b-fails.


Why do you say this It makes absolutely no sense. Why wouldn't a bodybuilder benefit from hypertrophy specific training? Scientifically, your 5-7 splits hold no water at all and are ineffective at best, compared to higher frequency cycled protocols.


Knowledgeable??? So they've managed to con you with philosophical clichés have they? Very little of what they advocate is scientifically sustainable and even less actually derives from studies.

jesus what the hell is your deal?? i admitted i was a little quick to dismiss them as useless and that they may work for some. but it is simply my opinion on the matter through personal experience (and the experience of others i train with) that there not very beneficial for a bodybuilder. i don't have a fucking degree nor do i have extensive research on the subject of FB, this is just MY TAKE ON THE MATTER :angrydude:, just like what you are saying is YOUR TAKE ON THE MATTER. you haven't made any kind of scientific claims yourself other than just saying it's "hypertrophy specific training" (wow, that's not a broad term at all) the way you really learn when it comes to training and bodybuilding in general is through trial and error not how many little scientfic reports and studies you've read. my trial of FB routines resulted in an error... thus how i derived my opinion!!!! forgive me if this is just so non-sequitar to you that feel the need to attack my opinion again because i don't have a lab study to go with it. you even posted in the past that your neither for or against my view on the matter, so why do you continue to argue when you don't even fully disagree with me

and your dismal of mike mentzer's philosphy on training by just calling it a "cliche" shows real ignorance.

 

[knight_rider]

^^^he said philosophical cliches, not 'cliches' in general!

Tunen has a point about Mentzer which anybody who has studied a philosophy unit at uni or privately will understand! Mentzer often derived many of his ideas purely by using a faux logic to present a HIT argument that had very little to do with science, and even observed evidence! He simply wrote well so that what he was pushing seemed infallable!

Mentzer i believed despite my above criticism, was very important in breaking down the volume addiction of the 70's and 80's, but he went to far or atleast presented his style of training with a religious zealotry that discounted all other forms of training!

like i said in an earlier post, many variables can be manipulated to get results, those being volume, intensity, frequency, exercise selection, nutrition etc!

FB routines decrease volume and exercise selection in favour of increased frequency, the logic being that muscle can recover in 48 hours, and strength progressions can be achieved at a higher rate than 'once per week' training leading to faster hypertrophy!

another point behind why perhaps your experience with FB may have not worked is because your volume exceeded your recuperative abilities or you had inadeqaute nutrition etc!

But yeah you've more than apologised for being rash, im just further elaborating some concerns for those who might be intrested in FB and UP/LOW training!

 

[Tunen]

jesus what the hell is your deal?? i admitted i was a little quick to dismiss them as useless and that they may work for some. but it is simply my opinion on the matter through personal experience (and the experience of others i train with) that there not very beneficial for a bodybuilder.

Your opinion has little relevance under the circumstances. You've most likely done a lot of things wrong.

i don't have a fucking degree nor do i have extensive research on the subject of FB, this is just MY TAKE ON THE MATTER :angrydude:, just like what you are saying is YOUR TAKE ON THE MATTER.

It's not my take on the matter. I present what is general scientific consensus on the matter. Takes on the matter have no relevance.

you haven't made any kind of scientific claims yourself other than just saying it's "hypertrophy specific training" (wow, that's not a broad term at all)

It's not my responsibility to present data. You are the one dismissing general scientific consensus based on hot air.

the way you really learn when it comes to training and bodybuilding in general is through trial and error not how many little scientfic reports and studies you've read.

Trial and error is definitely fundamental. But so is science. Dismissing results of controlled studies is kinda retarded imo.

my trial of FB routines resulted in an error... thus how i derived my opinion!!!! forgive me if this is just so non-sequitar to you that feel the need to attack my opinion again because i don't have a lab study to go with it.

You failed because you did it wrong. I don't attack you. I merely counter your philosophy with arguments.

you even posted in the past that your neither for or against my view on the matter, so why do you continue to argue when you don't even fully disagree with me

I fully disagree with a lot of the things you say. I don't disagree that splits have their place. Splitting into more than 3 makes no sense though.

and your dismal of mike mentzer's philosphy on training by just calling it a "cliche" shows real ignorance.

Epic self-ownage.

 

[Braaq]

There are many ways of training, like most science it is just a theory. Full body or once a week is just an example of many ways of inducing muscle hypertrophy. They both have their benefits, as well as their downfalls. It all depends on how you train, for instance, I train at such an intensity that I am sore for about 5 or more days. But if I was to train FB or UB/LB splits I would obviously train differently or in a way to give my body enough stimulus on the given day and enough time to recover in hopefully 48 hrs.
There is no creme de la creme of training to induce the maiximum muscle hypertrophy over any other. If that were the case then everyone would be using the same split and training regiment. Both Rocky/Tunen/Knight Rider and 20inchgunstucson make good points, but we are talking about theory (although some with more physiological knowledge than another) on how to best induce muscle hypertrophy. Again, we do not know for sure. But its clear that one can gain muscle using both methods. It's all based off of preference and how you prefer to train and/or how your body recovers.
From a personal standpoint my body responds great to once a week because of the intensity I train at. But I have never given full body a try, so I cannot from a personal standpoint say that FB does not work. But I can say that once a week split has worked great for me, but again I have nothing to compare it to.
From a physiological standpoint I can see how FB would work, but like I said I have a preference to once a week training and once I feel a plateau that I cannot overcome I will be glad to give FB a try. You never know how something works until you yourself try it out.

Thats just my two cents

 

[Tunen]

There are many ways of training, like most science it is just a theory. Full body or once a week is just an example of many ways of inducing muscle hypertrophy. They both have their benefits, as well as their downfalls. It all depends on how you train, for instance, I train at such an intensity that I am sore for about 5 or more days. But if I was to train FB or UB/LB splits I would obviously train differently or in a way to give my body enough stimulus on the given day and enough time to recover in hopefully 48 hrs.
There is no creme de la creme of training to induce the maiximum muscle hypertrophy over any other. If that were the case then everyone would be using the same split and training regiment. Both Rocky/Tunen/Knight Rider and 20inchgunstucson make good points, but we are talking about theory (although some with more physiological knowledge than another) on how to best induce muscle hypertrophy. Again, we do not know for sure. But its clear that one can gain muscle using both methods. It's all based off of preference and how you prefer to train and/or how your body recovers.
From a personal standpoint my body responds great to once a week because of the intensity I train at. But I have never given full body a try, so I cannot from a personal standpoint say that FB does not work. But I can say that once a week split has worked great for me, but again I have nothing to compare it to.
From a physiological standpoint I can see how FB would work, but like I said I have a preference to once a week training and once I feel a plateau that I cannot overcome I will be glad to give FB a try. You never know how something works until you yourself try it out.

Thats just my two cents

Good post. I disagree on a few accounts though...

That muscle tissue recovers in 48-72 hours is not theory. This is scientifically founded knowledge produced under controlled circumstances. As is the effects of high frequency training. Both methods produce results - high-frequency protocols just produce better results in healthy trained (and untrained) people in general.

 

[Braaq]

Good post. I disagree on a few accounts though...

That muscle tissue recovers in 48-72 hours is not theory. This is scientifically founded knowledge produced under controlled circumstances. As is the effects of high frequency training. Both methods produce results - high-frequency protocols just produce better results in healthy trained (and untrained) people in general.

Thanks
I have read that myself, I should have mentioned that. I was meaning on how to best induce muscle hypertrophy the best and most efficient way, is still relatively a theory so far. Because there are many successful ways of training. But you are completely right above, I just didn't state that above. Thanks for catching me on that and bringing that good point up.