Thread: Full Body this Summer, but next year This Split!?

I guess it is fine then! ;-)

I think you're throwing in too much work for the anterior musculature again. You have a lot more isolation stuff for the anterior delts, lateral delts, and chest, than the muscles on your back. If anything, I would say that it should be the reverse situation.

Too many leg extensions. They suck in my opinion. If you really want to do them, then just leave them in one of the workouts and take them out of the other.

I don't think supersetting certain exercises you have listed are a good idea. Compound lower body movements should generally not be supersetted with another lower body movement, unless the idea is to pre-exhaust a muscle or some such thing. However, I get the idea you're trying to simply save time to keep the total volume of the workout up. Not necessary. Certain combinations work well though, like the leg curls and extensions. Another good combination is a back extension and some situp variation (Or other hip flexion movement).

If you want to do supersets with the upper body for the same reason, then I would take advantage of reciprocal inhibition. Basically, when you work a muscle, its antagonist muscle will relax (When doing an overhead press your lats will be forced to relax to allow for shoulder abduction, for example). So, I would superset pullups with overhead pressing, rowing with bench pressing, etc.

Also, are you sure you want to plan this far ahead? You sound like me. I'm always trying to think what I'll be doing next. I've realized it's better to cross that bridge when you get to it. Your focus may change, new weak points may emerge, your ability to access certain equipment may change, etc.

Oh Cowpimp, you know me so well. Your totally right in every way! I'm gonna chill out - and I see the unbalance, yet again. I really don't need to be planning this far ahead, it gives me a weird false sense of security hah. Thanks again, your spot on.

And just so I know, in the future, would these superset groupings follow the 'opposites' rule well enough? (if I were to ever do supersets, I wanna makesure I have the right idea now atleast!)

one could superset:
-Bench Press + Dumbbell Row
-Dips + Cable Rows
-Seated Dumbbell Military Press + Pullups
-Curls +Triceps Extensions
-Leg Extensions + Leg Curls
----
and even other variations work still follow the same principle?
---
Chin-ups + Incline Dumbbell Bench Press
Bent-over Barbell Rows + Dips
Stiff-Back Seated Cable Rows +Close-Grip Bench Press

Do those all stay in line for a GOOD Balanced Superset?
Thanks.

P.S. Does anyone have any other good ones? I was trying to come up with some just for fun Hard to find an opposite workout for Lateral Raises...

opposite lateral raises are cable crossovers

forearm curls-reverse forearm curls
calf raise- reverse calf raise
DB flyes- rear lateral raises

Originally Posted by mike456

opposite lateral raises are cable crossovers

Nope. A cable crossover, which is really just a standing cable fly, involves putting the cables in front of your body (Transverse/horizontal flexion). The opposte would be some type of reverse fly (Transverse/horizontal extension); a scarecrow is a good example.

The opposite of lateral raises (Shoulder abduction) would be to stand directly between the stack and pull to your sides (Shoulder adduction). It's like a stiffarm pulldown but to your sides.

Originally Posted by mike456

forearm curls-reverse forearm curls
calf raise- reverse calf raise
DB flyes- rear lateral raises

No, forearm curls and reverse forearm curls are still just elbow flexion. The opposite would be some type of elbow extension, such as a tricep pushdown.

CowPimp, I see what you mean about crossovers not being the OPPOSITE as Side Lat Raises, BUT
would supersetting LOW (almost vertical) cross-over, and side lateral raises still be an acceptable superset match, in that the low cross-overs do involve some shoulder adduction for the first half of the movement??

Originally Posted by NMOY

CowPimp, I see what you mean about crossovers not being the OPPOSITE as Side Lat Raises, BUT
would supersetting LOW (almost vertical) cross-over, and side lateral raises still be an acceptable superset match, in that the low cross-overs do involve some shoulder adduction for the first half of the movement??

You could. I'm just trying to say that you shouldn't isolate the showy musculature at the expense of the muscles that you can't see, because they probably deserve the isolation at the expense of the showy muscles.

Is that you hinting that Military press would cover the 'showy' musculature, so
it is probably a better idea to spend isolation doing something like:
Reverse Flyes + Flyes
rather than
Lat Raises + Crossovers

??

Originally Posted by NMOY

Is that you hinting that Military press would cover the 'showy' musculature, so
it is probably a better idea to spend isolation doing something like:
Reverse Flyes + Flyes
rather than
Lat Raises + Crossovers

??

The showy musculature includes that of your arms, chest, abdomen, and shoulders. I'm saying that most people don't need to isolate their chest, front shoulders, and biceps, at least from the standpoint of balanced antagonist muscualture. However, most people do need to work on their upper backs a lot more.

I'm not saying that if you have a straight crappy chest that you should never do flys. It just seems to me that most people do all kinds of isolation crap for the aforementioned musculature and far less for their posterior delts, rotator cuff (More specifically the infraspinatus and teres minor), traps, etc.

cowpimp- do u know what a forearm curl is? no way its opposite a tricep push down: http://www.exrx.net/WeightExercises/...WristCurl.html - maybe i shoulda said wrist curl?

its wrist flexion- right??

You're right. I somehow missed the word forearm in there. I was thinking you were saying curls and reverse curls, for some reason. Brain fart.