Thread: Training Splits

I've been off the full body tip for a while. I'll probably go back to upper-lower at some point in the not too distant future.

I think changing splits is the best.

I generally alternate programs that use a split like push/pull/legs or upper/lower, with full body ones.

i'm doing upper/lower, it rocks.

so most of you guys are training each bodypart 2-3 times a week then?

my goal is hypertrophy and i am going to do a bodybuilding show this next summer so i am trying to put some muscle on in the time i have from now till when i start to cutt.

Originally Posted by WATTS

so most of you guys are training each bodypart 2-3 times a week then?

In totality, technically yes. However, when people follow their programs (if they ever planned one out), some muscles are used more than they have to be. E.g. triceps,or even worse, biceps

what about for those of you that train each bodypart directly once per week, how are your splits looking?

push/ pull/legs for me - sets of 8-10 right now

Originally Posted by WATTS

what about for those of you that train each bodypart directly once per week, how are your splits looking?

Very few people around here structure their programs like that. And for good reason - its a sucky way of doing things.

Stick to thinking in terms of planes of movement (horizontal, vertical) or movement types (push, pull), or both.

At the moment though im doing a Full Body 3x a week program (mon, wed, fri).

Originally Posted by Gazhole

Very few people around here structure their programs like that. And for good reason - its a sucky way of doing things.

Stick to thinking in terms of planes of movement (horizontal, vertical) or movement types (push, pull), or both.

At the moment though im doing a Full Body 3x a week program (mon, wed, fri).

you feel this is a good way to build size? compared to the other?

I am doing full body body undulating right now, but thinking of taking a break and doing something different.

I like it all!!!! No one thing for me, but if I had to pick a favorite it would be something with low reps and a good amount of volume....

I think splits are more effective then other,
i go:
monday; chest, biceps, shoulders,
tuesday; back, triceps, legs
wed: off
repeat
weekend off

Originally Posted by DiGiTaL

I think splits are more effective then other,
i go:
monday; chest, biceps, shoulders,
tuesday; back, triceps, legs
wed: off
repeat
weekend off

Wouldn't it be better to work your triceps with chest and shoulders and biceps with back for this set-up? what is the reasoning behind this layout?

Originally Posted by WATTS

you feel this is a good way to build size? compared to the other?

A training split doesnt dictate whether you will put on size or not. Its your diet, and to a lesser extent the rep ranges and intensities you use, that will promote hypertrophy and growth.

What upper/lower, full body, and push/pull/legs programs have over bodypart splits, is higher frequency, and its much easier to implement compound exercises. Plus its harder to overtrain a muscle. If youre doing shoulders, chest, and triceps all on separate days youre overtraining your triceps for sure, and most probably your shoulders.

All three can be put into an upper, push, or full body workout.

Have you read the training stickies at the top of the training section?

Originally Posted by Gazhole

A training split doesnt dictate whether you will put on size or not. Its your diet, and to a lesser extent the rep ranges and intensities you use, that will promote hypertrophy and growth.

A split dictates the frequency and a general direction of just about all other factors. Therefore, a split definitely dictates muscle growth.

What upper/lower, full body, and push/pull/legs programs have over bodypart splits, is higher frequency...

Voila. I must say though, that most 3/week p/p/l routines don't have a higher frequency than training a bodypart once per week.

Just a little nitpicking, I completely agree with the rest.

Originally Posted by Witchblade

A split dictates the frequency and a general direction of just about all other factors. Therefore, a split definitely dictates muscle growth.

I wouldnt say that. If you do a full body with very high reps at low intensity (18-20 reps) and low rest intervals (<30s), youll be less likely to stimulate hypertrophy than if you used moderate intensity, reps (6-8) and rest intervals (90s) even though its the same split.

Sure, on an upper/lower split youre going to be more likely to stimulate hypertrophy than on a bodypart split, but thats because body part splits suck .

What i meant was that just picking a split isnt going to automatically make you put on mass, there are many other factors you need to take into account as well.

Voila. I must say though, that most 3/week p/p/l routines don't have a higher frequency than training a bodypart once per week.

Just a little nitpicking, I completely agree with the rest.

With p/p/l, no. Ill agree there. That split isnt the best. Its better than bodyparts, but not the best. Upper/Lower is far better .

Originally Posted by Gazhole

A training split doesnt dictate whether you will put on size or not. Its your diet, and to a lesser extent the rep ranges and intensities you use, that will promote hypertrophy and growth.

What upper/lower, full body, and push/pull/legs programs have over bodypart splits, is higher frequency, and its much easier to implement compound exercises. Plus its harder to overtrain a muscle. If youre doing shoulders, chest, and triceps all on separate days youre overtraining your triceps for sure, and most probably your shoulders.

All three can be put into an upper, push, or full body workout.

Have you read the training stickies at the top of the training section?

also the main reason why people advocate training movements, and why it is better, is because it is easier to make a balanced program when thinking movements, wich is very important

Wouldn't it be better to work your triceps with chest and shoulders and biceps with back for this set-up? what is the reasoning behind this layout?

I find it I gett better results with that split and also it is approved with gopro so i think im good.

Originally Posted by mike456

also the main reason why people advocate training movements, and why it is better, is because it is easier to make a balanced program when thinking movements, wich is very important

Yup. This is also true.

Originally Posted by DiGiTaL

I find it I gett better results with that split ...

Better results than with what?

Originally Posted by DiGiTaL

I find it I gett better results with that split and also it is approved with gopro so i think im good.

That's cool. If you wouldn't mind sharing, how many exercises are you doing for your back and legs?

I prefer upper/lower.
That works good for me. But now thinking to try new push/pull/leg
may be after few days.

just starting a new one this week

1-chest/bicep
2-legs
3-shoulders
4-off
5back/tricep
6-off
7-off

on the days i do two bodyparts i will do the larger muscle in the morning and the smaller late afternoon/night

a) how is that any different from what you were already doing?

b) All that is, is a training split. You need a program. Something that manages the training variables. Alone, that means nothing.

That's cool. If you wouldn't mind sharing, how many exercises are you doing for your back and legs?

Each week its a set of differnet or similar exercises for the back and legs.
To see what the exercises I do, click
http://ironmagazine.com/article65.html
thats the workout I follow.

I currently use

Mon: Push
Tue Pull
Wed Off
Thur Legs
Fri Push

Monday rotate again... that way every three weeks, a certain group of bodyparts get two workouts per week.