Timing.

[xemaro]

K say that I was doing 3 exercises for my biceps, so when I finish one exercise how much rest time should I give to move on to the next exercise?

[Rahf]

K say that I was doing 3 exercises for my biceps, so when I finish one exercise how much rest time should I give to move on to the next exercise?

30 seconds - 3 minutes. Both of them being extremes. I'd say 2 minutes is a good rest period. All your resting should be counted in between the sets and not as in between exercises.

[compleks]

I think it's safe for us to assume you are training for hypertrophy?

What is your program like? What exercises are you doing?
Either way, you shouldn't be doing 3 exercises for biceps.

[xemaro]

I'm actually doing 2 exercises for my biceps right now

[mr popular]

Oh jesus not the biceps again. haha

There's nothing wrong with doing 3 exercises for the biceps... theres nothing wrong with doing 4 either...

and if you can hit them good with 2, then fine, but most people can't.

my bicep exercises, in order: Barbell curls, reverse bb curls, hammer curls, dumbbell curls. 4 exercises, each has a specific purpose and you can vary set/rep/load for each to maximize the affect.

3-4 exercises per muscle group is a classic general guideline for bodybuilding.... Don't people know this stuff anymore?

But in general I agree with Rahf, 2 minutes is about right, unless you can go sooner. I just say 2 minutes cuz if i move on before then, I get nauseated. Haha

~Brian

[compleks]

Argh, more bicep debates.

Sorry, I can't help myself.

These guys are all beginners. And as beginners a typical bodybuilding style workout is not appropriate (or atleast not necessary), if you ask me (which no one did, but bad luck!).
It has been shown numerous times, in numerous studies, that a simple full body program done 2-3 times a week will give results (size and strength) as good, if not better, than a generic bodybuilding split style routine.
The generic splits are typically training 4-6 days a week, with a longer duration than a simple full body routine.

I have nothing against split routines, or bodybuilding. But the majority of our forums demographic just don't need to be training that way, yet.

[hamelkarl]

around 1 mins! Except if your goal is to loose fat, then superset is the best!

[anfeyd]

Brian, I think what Complex is stressing here is efficiency. He (complex), is assuming the majority of those who post (given on their level of knowledge) are beginners. Excess work is not needed for them, and would most likely be a waste of time. Complex takes more of a coaching, or long term standpoint by recommending individuals to build up a foundation of strength/ learn the basic compound lifts before moving on and doing more sport specific work (whatever that sport may be).

The points you (brian) give are sound, but you seem to neglect the general level of fitness of the individual, and it seems as if you do not care about them- only yourself.

"Training is efficient if the highest sports result is achieved with the least expense of time and energy."

-Thomas Kurz

[compleks]

Yes, thankyou anfeyd. Well put.

[dogzer]

I (dogzer) agree with you (anfeyd)

[Kimimaro]

Xemaro, are you interested in being strong relative to the likes of physical conditioning and results in tricking or just simply to have fat defined biceps to get yourself a new gf? Just curious as to whats going on in your head.

[mr popular]

Compleks: Care to direct me towards what "studies" somehow prove that long-term split training is less effective than long-term fullbody training?

If a person wants to build muscle, I actually think the most efficient way to do that is with split training.

And you're right that training age matters, but its not like there is one never-changing split program that everybody must use.

It's as though you think when a person starts training with a split, they automatically must be lifting weights 7 times a week and dedicating an entire day to their biceps..

Which is fine for advanced bodybuilders, but a beginner would probably start with something simpler...

[compleks]

I didn't mention long term routines. I was talking about studies done on complete beginners.

I will dig some things up later, when I'm on my own computer.

[mr popular]

It's alright, I can wait.

Hey Compleks, how's your knowledge of nutrition?

Becuase a few days ago I actually came down with some really bad food poisoning. I lost about 10lbs from 2 and 1/2 days of sheer relentless vomitting..

I was wondering how soon I should get back into the swing of things... Some good suggestions for getting my stomach acid levels, and appetite back up to par.

Any ideas?

[Rahf]

It's alright, I can wait.

Hey Compleks, how's your knowledge of nutrition?

Becuase a few days ago I actually came down with some really bad food poisoning. I lost about 10lbs from 2 and 1/2 days of sheer relentless vomitting..

I was wondering how soon I should get back into the swing of things... Some good suggestions for getting my stomach acid levels, and appetite back up to par.

Any ideas?

Ack.. Food poisoning is no good. Did you get any antibiotics/medication for it?
I suggest resting thoroughly until you know for certain that you are fine. And the extra weight is probably from dehydration. Glycol loss.

[mr popular]

I had an anti-nausea injection into my beefy ass (which is now slightly flatter, and sore from the syringe).

I do plan to rest for at least the rest of this week, but I was thinking I might log my food intake at about 1500 today... try for 2000 tomorrow... and increase it so that i'm gaining the weight back, and i can be on track again sooner than later.

But if anybody has any actual experience with this that'd be great

haha!

I'm never eating a Moes burrito again as long as I live...................

~Brian

[compleks]

Haha, shit. That's nasty.

Keep your fluids up, those 10lbs were mostly water weight, which is alot of dehydration.

I don't know anything about the medication, but take it easy and slowly increase your food intake like you are planning. Ease back into things and you should be back to normal in no time.

I find light meals (and liquid meals) are easier on the stomach aswell. Things like fruits, scrambled eggs etc...

PS. Sue Moe.

[mr popular]

Sounds good, but scrambled eggs remind me of chicken....and chicken reminds me of

BLAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH*VOMITS A MILLION CHUNKS*

It sucks cuz going to this burrito place was actually something I did really often with my girlfriend and we loved the place, and there was this guy that worked there that I always imagined is exactly like jujimufu both in appearance and behaviour, except this guy has his long hair dyed red and sometimes he wears eyeliner i think... but other than that he's just a kickass funny guy that probably didn't wipe his ass before making my burrito.

WOOPS!

[Steve]

What an appropriate avatar for you, Karl, haha

[Kimimaro]

Chipotle ftw

[Rahf]

Sounds good, but scrambled eggs remind me of chicken....and chicken reminds me of

BLAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH*VOMITS A MILLION CHUNKS*

It sucks cuz going to this burrito place was actually something I did really often with my girlfriend and we loved the place, and there was this guy that worked there that I always imagined is exactly like jujimufu both in appearance and behaviour, except this guy has his long hair dyed red and sometimes he wears eyeliner i think... but other than that he's just a kickass funny guy that probably didn't wipe his ass before making my burrito.

WOOPS!

Eugh!

Remember to stay away from bacteria-dense food. No ice cream! Rinse/cook your food thoroughly (If you can that is..) and stay the heck away from burritos!

[compleks]

Well I spent the last 45 minutes rummaging through old textbooks and notes, trying to locate the studies I was referring to.
I couldn't find them, so I checked out PubMed etc. which is a real pain in the ass, and I gave up pretty quickly. So sorry, no luck.

Anyway, it's not like I was making some wild claim. All I really said was that a beginner can make equal gains (if not better) doing a basic full body routine over a generic 3-way split.

If I find anything, I will post it.

[mr popular]

See there are just too many variables that I never see get taken into consideration when experiments are done like that...

I mean, are they really using people who are all equally beginners to weightlifting/exercise? And if so.... are they just obese housewives!?

What kinds of exercises do they do? What kind of INTENSITY do they put into their workouts? What are the goals? What are they doing to ensure that every other factor (frequency, volume, etc.etc..) are equivalent between the two training methods?

Do you see what I'm saying here?

Do you see why I asked if there were any LONG-TERM studies done?

What I will say about full-body training, is that it is very fatiguing, and metabolically taxing. Which is good... for athletes, and people looking to lose fat. But very BAD for a beginner NEEDING TO GAIN WEIGHT

An ideal program for a beginner wanting to get his first spurt of growth, would be something simple, that is NOT calorically devastating like fullbody workouts 3x a week...

Also, I like split training because it teaches people how their muscles work and feel, and let's be honest. It's just more fun. haha

[anfeyd]

What I will say about full-body training, is that it is very fatiguing, and metabolically taxing. Which is good... for athletes, and people looking to lose fat. But very BAD for a beginner NEEDING TO GAIN WEIGHT

Can you give me an instance in which a beginner absoletly needs to gain weight, without regard to athletic performance?



Also, I like split training because it teaches people how their muscles work and feel, and let's be honest. It's just more fun. haha

Not to me, haha. I find split routines to be a drag.

[mr popular]

Can you give me an instance in which a beginner absoletly needs to gain weight, without regard to athletic performance?

Yes. When he wants bigger muscles -- particularly bigger biceps.

Of course weightlifting will require some athleticism but that comes along with normal training... theres no need to do some remedial "athleticism" to get a person "ready" to start bodybuilding...

I hate all this overcomplicated backtracking bullshit... first you people say "split training is worthless!!" .... oh, woops, every professional bodybuilder uses it, and so do many athletes, and regular people. Guess that was stupid.

then you try to say "well, it's only good for the genetic elite!" .... too bad the number of people that have success with split routines goes beyond what is possible to consider "elite" percentages...

THEN you try to tell us "well... split training is only good for advanced bodybuilders, not beginners!"..... for SOME REASON!? Oh, oops, unfortunately split training doesn't automatically mean focussing on each individual muscle using only isolation exercises..

Why can't we just admit that there is nothing wrong with split training?


Not to me, haha. I find split routines to be a drag.

What kind of split did you try? What did you do?

I'm not trying to prove split training=fun, haha, i'm just curious man..

understandably some people like fullbody training better, some people like upper/lower better.... My problem is the demonization of split training, for no reason at all... and the glorification of "fullbody training"...again, for no reason at all.

~Brian

[rock_ten]

What I will say about full-body training, is that it is very fatiguing, and metabolically taxing. Which is good... for athletes, and people looking to lose fat. But very BAD for a beginner NEEDING TO GAIN WEIGHT

full body workouts need not neccessarily be more calorically demanding. Without knowing what one is actually doing the particular split or FB routine that we're comparing, there's no way to say.

And besides, weight lifting workouts generally burn around fuck-all calories. You probably burn more calories walking to the gym than you do while you're there.

I think I mentioned before, that you need only go outside of TT to see that "fuller"-body routines are basically the only way any athlete weight trains.

http://www.dragondoor.com/articler/mode3/310/ I haven't read it yet (well I have, a long time ago) and I don't know what kind of argument it presents, but it is relevant.

[Rahf]

I do split training.

And I enjoy it as well.

I'm still alive and making newbie gains.

I'm not injured yet.

Can we agree that it works for beginners now?

[rock_ten]

I do split training.

And I enjoy it as well.

I'm still alive and making newbie gains.

I'm not injured yet.

Can we agree that it works for beginners now?

no one said it won't give results (work). It will "work" for anyone, the question is whether a fuller-body approach will work better.

[Rahf]

Better in terms of gains? Nobody can really tell. It's one of those things where the amount of variables pretty much makes a test abit void.

[rock_ten]

Better in terms of gains? Nobody can really tell. It's one of those things where the amount of variables pretty much makes a test abit void.

hmm, sort of. But the hugely important variable is how often you're training each lift, or muscles if you want to think of it like that.

But its ok, dude. Not everyone wants to be awesome.

[rock_ten]

Rahf, I think you said a couple of weeks ago to remind you to post your strength improvements so far?

Don't worry, I know it has nothing to do with this debate about split routines vs. effective training.

[Rahf]

Ah yes. I'll post them up with the March report. I was actually about worried about the flaming due to my weakness but I'll just take the hits if anyone feels like doing that. Keep a sharp eye in the beginning of April.

[rock_ten]

Ah yes. I'll post them up with the March report. I was actually about worried about the flaming due to my weakness but I'll just take the hits if anyone feels like doing that. Keep a sharp eye in the beginning of April.

you won't get owned for being weak. But you will for staying weak.

[Rahf]

you won't get owned for being weak. But you will for staying weak.

DundunDUN!! *Dramatic music*

[compleks]

Okay, this is getting stupid now.
You're all getting defensive and assuming shit that hasn't been said.

Mr. P: I know what you mean about the studies, and I agree, there are alot of variables. But that is beyond our control, and doesn't necessarily make such information void. Besides, alot of the points you made would most likely be even throughout the groups, so the results wouldn't be too much effected.

I still don't see why you would debate this. A full body program can be just as effective in size and strength gains as a split routine, for a beginner. Do you really believe that this is untrue?

Also, let me get this straight. I have nothing against the idea of split routines. Hell, I used to use them all the time. But it was mostly a basic upper/lower or push/pull split. I'm not hating on splits, but I believe most people look towards split training for the wrong reasons, and use them ineffectively or inappropriately.

What you said about full body routines, I just plain disagree with.
What I will say about full-body training, is that it is very fatiguing, and metabolically taxing. Which is good... for athletes, and people looking to lose fat. But very BAD for a beginner NEEDING TO GAIN WEIGHT

Your making assumptions about what an actual program would look like.

Squat, Dips, Chinups, Hyperextions. It can be that easy, and yes! it still works. Abbreviated programs are great in many cases.

Also, I don't remember any of the backtracking you speak of. So I'm not sure what that post was all about.

Anyway, this debate is pretty useless. This thread is full of assumptions, which is why half the replies don't make any sense. I'm probably guilty of that aswell, but this isn't going to get anywhere because no body even knows exactly what is being argued.

My point was:
Alot of people look to split routines for the wrong reasons. When I believe they could be saving time, while still achieving their goals through a properly constructed full body routine.
Actually, I wouldn't even have a problem if they followed a properly constructed split routine. But for whatever reason people seem to think a split routine needs isolation work and 3 exercises for the biceps.

I have nothing against split routines, or bodybuilding. But the majority of our forums demographic just don't need to be training that way, yet.

[compleks]

God damn, that was probably a massive waste of time.

[Rahf]

God damn, that was probably a massive waste of time.

Nah it was very useful. If I could, I would hack your signature again.

My split routine is basically a muscle group 4-split. This is mostly because I have alot of time and also since I enjoy lifting weights.

[mr popular]

I still don't see why you would debate this. A full body program can be just as effective in size and strength gains as a split routine, for a beginner. Do you really believe that this is untrue?

It depends on: a beginner to what? If it is a beginner to a certain sport, then no it does not really matter if they are still a novice if all they wanna do is play basketball or trick. Other sports however, such as football, rugby, professional strongman, and Bodybuilding in particular, yes I think it does matter.

Becuase in those sports, putting on size is a fundamental part, and I don't believe fullbody workouts are sufficient -- even for a beginner.

Why? Well, if *you* think that split training, and fullbody training, will provide equal results for a beginner, then why don't they just begin with a split routine instead of a fullbody routine? It would make a lot more sense, because that is where they will most likely end up if they stick with it.

Most NFL players, rugby players, strongman competitors, and nearly all professional bodybuilders, use bodypart split routines to put on muscle.

Your making assumptions about what an actual program would look like.

Squat, Dips, Chinups, Hyperextions. It can be that easy, and yes! it still works. Abbreviated programs are great in many cases.

Actually, I didn't think it was necessary to make any assumptions about the actual exercises being done in a fullbody program. The fact that you are working out your entire body in one training session, I believe would be much more metabolically taxing than only focussing on one or two muscle groups.

Unless, of course -- like most people -- the trainee is completely half-assing their fullbody workouts. Which is another reason I believe they are actually inferior when it comes to building muscle. They are just too easy to HALF-ASS, even unintentionally due to fatigue.

My point was:
Alot of people look to split routines for the wrong reasons. When I believe they could be saving time, while still achieving their goals through a properly constructed full body routine.
Actually, I wouldn't even have a problem if they followed a properly constructed split routine. But for whatever reason people seem to think a split routine needs isolation work and 3 exercises for the biceps.

For whatever reason you seem to think there's something wrong with isolation work. Is focussing on one particular muscle that mind blowing?

And 3 exercises for the biceps? I mean sure, if you're going to do barbell curls... then EZ bar curls... then dumbbell curls..... that would just suggest you didn't give your all to the very first exercise.

But I personally don't do that, and I use 3-4 exercises for my biceps, each with a different purpose.

And we are having this entire discussion, in fact, because you didnt think it was necessary for someone who wants bigger biceps to be focussing more on their biceps, whereas I thought they definitely should since that is this moron's only goal aside from "nice decent chest muscles" whatever the fuck that means

So NO it wasn't a waste of time because it gives me another chance to SHOUT OFF AGAIN, which I enjoy doing sometimes, but only when I don't have to talk to a mongoloid idiot, so don't think I want to put you down or anything, I just disagree with your ideas about split/fullbody training.

~Brian

[compleks]

Haha, now we are getting somewhere.
Don't worry, I'm not taking anything personally. Difference of opinion is fine with me, it's why different methods of training exist.

Here we go again...

It depends on: a beginner to what? If it is a beginner to a certain sport, then no it does not really matter if they are still a novice if all they wanna do is play basketball or trick. Other sports however, such as football, rugby, professional strongman, and Bodybuilding in particular, yes I think it does matter.
I'm not sure I understood this properly, so no comment.

Becuase in those sports, putting on size is a fundamental part, and I don't believe fullbody workouts are sufficient -- even for a beginner.
Fair enough. I personally believe that full body programs are sufficient for beginners. I also believe that a good full body program is a good starting point as far as general conditioning and learning proper technique.
I don't believe professional athletes (bodybuilders not included) need to be doing isolation work. I really do believe their time could be better spent, and that the benefits are of little significance. Based on a simple cost benefit evaluation.

Why? Well, if *you* think that split training, and fullbody training, will provide equal results for a beginner, then why don't they just begin with a split routine instead of a fullbody routine? It would make a lot more sense, because that is where they will most likely end up if they stick with it.
Because a full body program is generally more efficient in terms of time constraints. This would depend alot on the actual programs, but I'm generalizing. I also believe that full body programs are where most people should begin, for reasons stated above and as a general progression.

Also, they may or may not end up doing a split routine. This would depend on the client and their goals.

Most NFL players, rugby players, strongman competitors, and nearly all professional bodybuilders, use bodypart split routines to put on muscle.
I didn't want to bring up this argument, but you can't apply the methods of professional bodybuilders to everyday people and beginners who don't have the 'assistance' of the pros.

Also, we are talking about 15-19 year olds in most cases here, they are far from being professional athletes.

But, as far as the other athletes go, I don't believe that they should be following such body part split routines on any long term basis. And I believe that most well managed teams only follow these programs in the off season before turning their focus to their ultimate goals.

Actually, that made me think. I'm sure that sounded like a bit of a contradiction, so let me try to explain.
You have to remember that I am taking this whole discussion from a different perspective than yourself. I am thinking about this whole thing in terms of the forum members, and assuming a few things because of this.

1) They are here because they are into tricking, and want to get better.
2) They are probably complete beginners to weight training.
3) They are all quite young for the most part, and therefore don't really know what they want. Or they just want stupid shit. (man I sound like an ass)

Anyway, I believe it would be in their best interest to begin their training with a more sport specific approach. This will give them a step up in terms of their athletic abilities (strength, speed, power etc.) which will benefit them regardless of what they do in the future.
They are likely to change their minds as to what they want, but having a solid foundation of general condition will be transferable to whatever they pursue physically.

And I still believe that a more sport specific full body program will give them the gains in size they may desire (depending on diet and other factors).
I believe that this base fitness will benefit them in whatever they turn their focus to: tricking, martial arts, bodybuilding, swimming... whatever.


Actually, I didn't think it was necessary to make any assumptions about the actual exercises being done in a fullbody program. The fact that you are working out your entire body in one training session, I believe would be much more metabolically taxing than only focussing on one or two muscle groups.
I dissagree. You need to consider the total volume, intensity, frequency, duration and other principles of prescription.
This is also the premise for the split routine, being that a full body routine may not allow you sufficient time to tax your muscles to the extent you want. So the split was developed so you could dedicate more time to working certain muscles / groups.

Unless, of course -- like most people -- the trainee is completely half-assing their fullbody workouts. Which is another reason I believe they are actually inferior when it comes to building muscle. They are just too easy to HALF-ASS, even unintentionally due to fatigue.
Everything is easy to half ass.
The big boys didn't get where they are by slacking off, they train hard regardless of the program. I have seen splits that are far more taxing than some full body programs, and vice-versa of course. I see this as a result of the program, and not whether it is full body or a split.

For whatever reason you seem to think there's something wrong with isolation work. Is focussing on one particular muscle that mind blowing?
What I find mind blowing is the number of people going to the gym and only training their chest and biceps. Sure, there are going to be idiots regardless, but a little education wouldn't go astray.
I've got nothing against isolation work, if it is used appropriately. Remember, this is a tricking forum, and the majority of members are here because they want to learn to trick. And if they do take an interest in weight training, then it may aswell be of use to their other interests.
Most of them are beginners aswell.

And 3 exercises for the biceps? I mean sure, if you're going to do barbell curls... then EZ bar curls... then dumbbell curls..... that would just suggest you didn't give your all to the very first exercise.

But I personally don't do that, and I use 3-4 exercises for my biceps, each with a different purpose.
That's fine if it works for you. Personally I doubt there are many people here who would benefit from that kind of volume on a single muscle.
I'm not up to scratch with what the bodybuilders are doing these days, but I'm sure 4 exercises (assuming 3-4 sets of each, 8-12 reps?) is probably pretty common. But remember, these guys have alot of assistance, bodybuilding is their life.

And we are having this entire discussion, in fact, because you didnt think it was necessary for someone who wants bigger biceps to be focussing more on their biceps, whereas I thought they definitely should since that is this moron's only goal aside from "nice decent chest muscles" whatever the fuck that means
I hate to sound like their parents, but sometimes I just happen to know better. Sometimes I have to tell people that their goals are un-realistic, and that they would be better off doing 'this' or 'that'. In the future, if they still just want huge biceps, then I will back them all the way.

So NO it wasn't a waste of time because it gives me another chance to SHOUT OFF AGAIN, which I enjoy doing sometimes, but only when I don't have to talk to a mongoloid idiot, so don't think I want to put you down or anything, I just disagree with your ideas about split/fullbody training.

~Brian
No worries.

Fuck, my brain is scattered at the moment. I keep going off on random tangents, so hopefully you can still see where I'm coming from.
But anyway, it's been insightful for me hearing your opinion, and I have actually had to think about my own 'philosophy'.

Cheers for now.

[mr popular]

Yes, I do see where you're coming from, and it seems that our major conflict here is that you give your advice specifically based on the premise that the people asking it here will be 15-19 year olds interested in tricking

Whereas I do not give tricking advice, because I only care about tricking as far as the kicks, because of my Karate and Tae Kwon Do career, and in fact haven't done them in a while. I will, however, give martial arts advice, and advice to particular people who I feel are beginning very similarly to the way i did in building muscle, and are looking for a plan, such as Rahf

The thing about this thread IN PARTICULAR, is the OP -- as far as i know -- has never even asked a single question, or made any mention of tricking. ever.

He wants to bench for nice chest muscles, and he wants nice biceps. That's really all i can gather from what he writes.

So if I ever were to actually give him advice (which.... i haven't. because he appears to be an idiot. haha!), it would be advice on building up the mirror muscles with minimal effort.

You and I both agree that is a stupid goal, only I handle it by either giving bullshit responses (as in his bench press thread), or none at all, and you try to trick them into doing what is probably better for them -- except it will never hit them the way you want because they are an idiot, and it just ends up becoming an entire thread about you and me discussing the benefits and downsides of certain training philosophies

So really we are both pointless......

THOUGH I WILL SAY THIS!

Of course we all understand that olympic bodybuilders are assisted by steroids, and growth hormone, and everything else. And they absolutely should be!

But if you think that is the reason all bodybuilders use split routines, then you are getting the cart before the horse there...

[compleks]

But if you think that is the reason all bodybuilders use split routines, then you are getting the cart before the horse there...
No, not at all what I meant.
I just think people need to be careful when emulating, or taking advice from pro. bodybuilders.

As pointless as this all may have been, I still learned a lot, so it wasn't a complete waste of time.

I wonder how much of this the original poster actually read.

[rock_ten]

rock_ten read it all.

[compleks]

Okay.

[Birch]

i did not

[Rahf]

*Edit*
Rahf read it all now.

[rock_ten]

:smile:

[Birch]

.....no

[mr popular]

The OP probably stopped reading at post#5, when I first commented.