CT or Waterbury? Frequency for Muscle Growth

Bigger Stronger Leaner Competitive Bodybuilding
41

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Sagat wrote:
when you see BBs, fighters, recreational lifters, begginers doing the same routine something is wrong.

The only person in that list you just wrote who might NEED a different routine is the “fighter”. The rest would be after hypertrophy so why would they ignore what has worked the best for the most people?[/quote]

Ever seen Matt Hughes’ weight routine? Bobybuilding split all the way.

Why would a recreational lifter want to use a protocol that’s been proven to be inferior for just about everything except Olympic lifting?

(I must admit that I really do like the Bill Starr 5x5 routine as I enjoy frequent squatting, benching and rowing but I’ll also be the first to admit that I’d do it because I enjoy it, not that I believe it’s better than other methods.)

42

I have a question directly for CT (anybody can chime in though of course)

ut first thanks for all of the replies Im really enjoying this discussion.

ok, so CT, you say you train athletes and bodybuilders differently which is a given so I have a few questions regarding that. If someones goal is to “look better” and make aesthetic enhancements in terms of hypertrophy why couldnt you just hit them with s 3x a week full body or upper lower? BUT fosusing on bodybuilding principals.

for instance,

fullbody routine
2 exercises of chest superset

i.e. incline bench ss incline flies floowed by flat bench ss flat flies

2 exercsise of back with same pattern
2 shoulder
2 legs
1 arms

3 sets each really focusing on the negative (maybe a 4 second eccentric)
8-15 reps

would that not be moving towards aesthetic hypertrophy or are you saying that less frequency is ‘better’ (for lack of a better word) for just looking good.

by the way the small routine was just an example Im more being the devils advocate for the sake of discussion.

thanks again! cant wait for those articles!

43

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

The more often you can stimulate a muscle without exceeding your capacity to recover, the more you’ll progress. Two things are important in that sentence: you must actually stimulate the muscles to grow. [/quote]

CT,
You stated that you will progress, but in what area, hypertrohpy, strength or both?

Just curious, because I have done BP splits for most of my weightlifting years and I just recently switched to a TB routine based on CW’s program design. I got to say that it feels awesome and I expect results, but I have only been doing it for 8 days now.

I am hoping for gains in the hypertrohpy department. It seems most posters feel the TB routines are more for beginners, but I have been lifting on and off for 10 years now and don’t really feel like a beginner. I remember Poliquin saying that the best program is the one you are not doing, so couldn’t TB training be good for anyone as a break from the norm who has been doing BP splits for a long time? I mean, we all now periodization is a good thing.

44

[quote]timmcbride00 wrote:
Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

The more often you can stimulate a muscle without exceeding your capacity to recover, the more you’ll progress. Two things are important in that sentence: you must actually stimulate the muscles to grow.

CT,
You stated that you will progress, but in what area, hypertrohpy, strength or both?

Just curious, because I have done BP splits for most of my weightlifting years and I just recently switched to a TB routine based on CW’s program design. I got to say that it feels awesome and I expect results, but I have only been doing it for 8 days now.

I am hoping for gains in the hypertrohpy department. It seems most posters feel the TB routines are more for beginners, but I have been lifting on and off for 10 years now and don’t really feel like a beginner. I remember Poliquin saying that the best program is the one you are not doing, so couldn’t TB training be good for anyone as a break from the norm who has been doing BP splits for a long time? I mean, we all now periodization is a good thing. [/quote]

I am not even trying to answer for CT as I am sure he has his own perspective completely, but why are so many of you STILL separating strength and size like the two aren’t related at all?

Yes, CNS blah blah blah. Strength and size go together like fat girls and pints of cookie dough ice cream. Even though some bodybuilders may later increase reps or even decrease the weight used, that heavy weight is what helped to get them that damn big in the first place.

The largest bodybuilders are often usually some of the strongest people in the gym. Just because you all can point out exceptions to that rule it doesn’t erase that fact.

Strength and size are directly related.

Eat to get big. Lift to get stronger. Why try to change what has worked for about a century now?

45

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Strength and size go together like fat girls and pints of cookie dough ice cream.
[/quote]
That’s some funny stuff!

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Even though some bodybuilders may later increase reps or even decrease the weight used, that heavy weight is what helped to get them that damn big in the first place.
[/quote]

You make an excellent point, we all try to progressively overload during our workout programs…why because we all know that getting stronger will yield size gains.
Do you feel there is efficacy for TB routines if they are designed right? I guess, I feel that since I am hitting a deadlift or squat every workout, plus 1 major push and pull at each workout, how can my body not grow from that, i.e. major compound movements with heavy weight?

I do four different rep ranges, 3,10,6,9 throughout the week so I hit really heavy weights on the 3 and 6 rep days.

46

[quote]timmcbride00 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Strength and size go together like fat girls and pints of cookie dough ice cream.

That’s some funny stuff!

Professor X wrote:
Even though some bodybuilders may later increase reps or even decrease the weight used, that heavy weight is what helped to get them that damn big in the first place.

You make an excellent point, we all try to progressively overload during our workout programs…why because we all know that getting stronger will yield size gains.
Do you feel there is efficacy for TB routines if they are designed right? I guess, I feel that since I am hitting a deadlift or squat every workout, plus 1 major push and pull at each workout, how can my body not grow from that, i.e. major compound movements with heavy weight?

I do four different rep ranges, 3,10,6,9 throughout the week so I hit really heavy weights on the 3 and 6 rep days.[/quote]

I feel that TBT neglects muscle groups. My lateral head of my deltoids use to not be there when I was in the first year or two of training. That was because I didn’t even do lateral raises as my knowledge of lifting at the time was very limited. As a result, my shoulders were not impressive. Mind you, I feel my genetics in that area are above average…which means them not growing was directly because I was not training them directly even though I was doing overhead presses and even upright rows.

I have also seen the same on this forum. One poster in particular, WolBarret showed a lack of growth in that area in his progress pics. His shoulders were clearly anterior delt dominant with the lateral and posterior heads lagging behind. He was also using TBT.

There is no way I would recommend that type of training to someone with a goal of looking proportionate at all UNLESS someone was already very proportionate and they were simply trying something different at an advanced stage of training…OR they had the coordination of a drunk college student after 12 shots of Tequila.

This entire idea only caught on the way it did because of all of that “functional” bullshit that had people believing that bodybuilders couldn’t lift 35lbs dumbbells or climb stairs.

47

I get what you are saying about being proportionaly and neglecting muscle groups, which is why I have tried to design the program carefully. I typically complete the core of the program in 25 to 30 minutes, therefore I have time to spend about 5 to 10 minutes on auxilary exercises to focus on my weak areas. I throw in hamstring raises, face pulls, forearm stuff, or upright rows on different days to hit some of the areas not targeted in the routine.

I tried to look for WolBarrett’s pictures, could you point me to the thread?

Thanks for taking the time to reply to me.

48

[quote]timmcbride00 wrote:
I get what you are saying about being proportionaly and neglecting muscle groups, which is why I have tried to design the program carefully. I typically complete the core of the program in 25 to 30 minutes, therefore I have time to spend about 5 to 10 minutes on auxilary exercises to focus on my weak areas. I throw in hamstring raises, face pulls, forearm stuff, or upright rows on different days to hit some of the areas not targeted in the routine.

I tried to look for WolBarrett’s pictures, could you point me to the thread?

Thanks for taking the time to reply to me.[/quote]

Ask WolBarrett for that thread. He may not even feel comfortable about me talking about him here without his consent.

49

When I drive to work 6 mornings per week, I take a certain route. It’s not that I couldn’t turn right out of my driveway instead of left, I could.

Then I’d take a left (traffic permitting), stop, another left, drive about 10 minutes down that road only to arrive at work 20 minutes later than I otherwise would have. I’d end up late (unless I had gotten out of bed earlier), used more gas, missed my morning coffee stop and wasted otherwise useful time than had I just used the BEST route to work.

Sure I may have seen a deer in a field or had a different view of the sunrise but shit man, I’m just trying to get to work the fastest, most productive way I can. I’m not looking to see how LONG it takes to get there.

50

[quote]timmcbride00 wrote:
Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

The more often you can stimulate a muscle without exceeding your capacity to recover, the more you’ll progress. Two things are important in that sentence: you must actually stimulate the muscles to grow.

CT,
You stated that you will progress, but in what area, hypertrohpy, strength or both?

Just curious, because I have done BP splits for most of my weightlifting years and I just recently switched to a TB routine based on CW’s program design. I got to say that it feels awesome and I expect results, but I have only been doing it for 8 days now.

I am hoping for gains in the hypertrohpy department. It seems most posters feel the TB routines are more for beginners, but I have been lifting on and off for 10 years now and don’t really feel like a beginner. I remember Poliquin saying that the best program is the one you are not doing, so couldn’t TB training be good for anyone as a break from the norm who has been doing BP splits for a long time? I mean, we all now periodization is a good thing. [/quote]

Many people, aside from Poliquin, have stated that the best program is the one you are not on. I do not know about this. There are powerlifters, bodybuilders, and Olympic lifters who used the same routines for YEARS and made continuous progress. Mel Siff stated this observation on his Yahoo listserv once and there was a thread on it. I have been on the same program, albeit MINOR, adjustments for the past year and half and have made the most progress I have ever have in that time frame.

Dorian Yates and Michael Francois also stated that they only went through a handful of programs for their entire careers. Dorian only used THREE programs, aside from his initial TBT beginner routine of one month, for his entire lifting career, from '83 to '97. This is why I no longer understand that statement. Powerlifters like Kirk Karwoski and Ed Coan did not change much either.

51

And the thing about being big and wimpy, as Professor has pointed out…
There have been PLENTY of bodybuilders, natural and drug aided, that have been VERY strong, especially the ones at the top. I am talking of Ronnie Coleman, Dorian Yates, Bertil Fox, Casey Viator, Mike Mentzer, Tom Platz, Skip La Cour, Chris Duffy (had a very impressive deadlift), Gary Strydom, and a whole slew of others. The ones that chose not to lift and eat like a madman, Paul Dillet, Shawn Ray, Flex Wheeler, always finished at the middle of the pack. However, they too were stronger than your average guy as well.

52

[quote]Bricknyce wrote:

Many people, aside from Poliquin, have stated that the best program is the one you are not on. I do not know about this. There are powerlifters, bodybuilders, and Olympic lifters who used the same routines for YEARS and made continuous progress. Mel Siff stated this observation on his Yahoo listserv once and there was a thread on it. I have been on the same program, albeit MINOR, adjustments for the past year and half and have made the most progress I have ever have in that time frame.

Dorian Yates and Michael Francois also stated that they only went through a handful of programs for their entire careers. Dorian only used THREE programs, aside from his initial TBT beginner routine of one month, for his entire lifting career, from '83 to '97. This is why I no longer understand that statement. Powerlifters like Kirk Karwoski and Ed Coan did not change much either.
[/quote]

Die, stupid, meaningless phrase, die!

Seriously that line has got to be the most idiotic thing in print I’ve ever read regarding weight training.

I’ve never personally gained an ounce of muscle training on a program I was not using at the moment.

(Calling Yogi Berra… Calling Yogi Berra…)

And yes, I know what he was trying to say, it’s still stupid. But let’s not let that stop it from being thrown around like it actually means anything.

53

My interpretation of “the best program is the one your not on” is … the grass will always be greener on the other side of the fence.

54

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Sagat wrote:
when you see BBs, fighters, recreational lifters, begginers doing the same routine something is wrong.

The only person in that list you just wrote who might NEED a different routine is the “fighter”. The rest would be after hypertrophy so why would they ignore what has worked the best for the most people?[/quote]

For the same reason a begginer in martial arts doesnt need to train like pro mma fighter… Maybe i wasnt clear, when i talked about recreational lifters and begginers i was talking about that average fitness people who want SOME muscle, lose some fat, and often run, play sports… not someone who only goal is get huge.

These guys are put in high volume routines, 5-6 exercises per bodypart, when they actually dont know how to push hard enogth even for one set. They may want to train like a BBer if they enjoy it, but i dont believe they NEED to train like one to build 10kg of muscle and lose the same amount of fat as they think, some basic tbt 3x a week is more than enogh for it.

55

[quote]Sagat wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Sagat wrote:
when you see BBs, fighters, recreational lifters, begginers doing the same routine something is wrong.

The only person in that list you just wrote who might NEED a different routine is the “fighter”. The rest would be after hypertrophy so why would they ignore what has worked the best for the most people?

For the same reason a begginer in martial arts doesnt need to train like pro mma fighter… Maybe i wasnt clear, when i talked about recreational lifters and begginers i was talking about that average fitness people who want SOME muscle, lose some fat, and often run, play sports… not someone who only goal is get huge. [/quote]

What difference does that make? I was a beginner who used a body part split routine. Are you saying that this should have been avoided?

This isn’t about martial arts or any other sport where the goal IS TO LEARN THAT SPORT OR ACTIVITY. This is about building muscle mass, and although you seem unaware, while minor issues like the number of sets or exercises might change, my overall “strategy” has not changed in several years.

Have you even tried thinking about this for yourself instead of repeating what you’ve read?

Is the bench press somehow a different movement for a 150lbs man than it is for a 250lbs man? No…it’s just heavier.

[quote]
These guys are put in high volume routines, 5-6 exercises per bodypart, when they actually dont know how to push hard enogth even for one set. They may want to train like a BBer if they enjoy it, but i dont believe they NEED to train like one to build 10kg of muscle and lose the same amount of fat as they think, some basic tbt 3x a week is more than enogh for it.[/quote]

What routine have you seen that recommends 6 different full exercises for any one body part? I started doing 2-3 exercises and STILL do about 3 exercises per body part.

Do you actually know how this works?

56

[quote]jstreet0204 wrote:
Sagat wrote:
About, the tbt thing: as i mentioned i’m not against split routines, if i planned to go compete in bodybuilding that is how i would train. What i’m against is the notion that all training routines should be based in BB, when you see BBs, fighters, recreational lifters, begginers doing the same routine something is wrong. A BBer may need a lot of volume and intensity to grow so tbt is not pratical for him, but its hard to explain to a guy 50kgs lighter, have never lifted weights and plays soccer twice a week that tbt can be good for him (and you are not stupid for training him differently of a pro BBer).

Is this not the “Bodybuilding” forum?

[/quote]

I always understood (maybe i was wrong all this time) that it was more bodybuilding in the sense of building the body , building muscle and losing fat, than in the sense of the sport bodybuilding. I bet that most posting here will never step in a stage, probably 90% of the writers of this site arent bodybuilders…

In a old TC article he talks about the T-Nation ideal of being a guy who looks badass that makes nobody start trouble with him, but if someone is crazy enogh then you actually are badass to kick his butt or something like that… to me seems like this site doesnt follow a strict sense of the word bodybuilding, altough its still part of it. Dont get me wrong, i’m not one of these anti BB guys you see here, i even went to a BB show another day.

57

[quote]Sagat wrote:
jstreet0204 wrote:
Sagat wrote:
About, the tbt thing: as i mentioned i’m not against split routines, if i planned to go compete in bodybuilding that is how i would train. What i’m against is the notion that all training routines should be based in BB, when you see BBs, fighters, recreational lifters, begginers doing the same routine something is wrong. A BBer may need a lot of volume and intensity to grow so tbt is not pratical for him, but its hard to explain to a guy 50kgs lighter, have never lifted weights and plays soccer twice a week that tbt can be good for him (and you are not stupid for training him differently of a pro BBer).

Is this not the “Bodybuilding” forum?

I always understood (maybe i was wrong all this time) that it was more bodybuilding in the sense of building the body , building muscle and losing fat, than in the sense of the sport bodybuilding. I bet that most posting here will never step in a stage, probably 90% of the writers of this site arent bodybuilders…

In a old TC article he talks about the T-Nation ideal of being a guy who looks badass that makes nobody start trouble with him, but if someone is crazy enogh then you actually are badass to kick his butt or something like that… to me seems like this site doesnt follow a strict sense of the word bodybuilding, altough its still part of it. Dont get me wrong, i’m not one of these anti BB guys you see here, i even went to a BB show another day.[/quote]

Dude, this is the BODYBUILDING fucking forum on a BODYBUILDING website. Yes, they focus on other sports as well, but that doesn’t erase where you are currently posting.

Bullshit like this is why that T-Cell now exists. We don’t have to acknowledge every fucking sport on the planet in every conversation, especially in THIS forum.

58

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Sagat wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Sagat wrote:

What difference does that make? I was a beginner who used a body part split routine. Are you saying that this should have been avoided?

This isn’t about martial arts or any other sport where the goal IS TO LEARN THAT SPORT OR ACTIVITY. This is about building muscle mass, and although you seem unaware, while minor issues like the number of sets or exercises might change, my overall “strategy” has not changed in several years.

Have you even tried thinking about this for yourself instead of repeating what you’ve read?

Is the bench press somehow a different movement for a 150lbs man than it is for a 250lbs man? No…it’s just heavier.

What routine have you seen that recommends 6 different full exercises for any one body part? I started doing 2-3 exercises and STILL do about 3 exercises per body part.

Do you actually know how this works?

[/quote]

I agree completly about the number exercises, when i use split routines or prescribe them i never do this much… but someone reads in some magazine that Arnold used to do 30 sets per body part, Arnold was huge, you see the conclusion…

About the average gym people, they CAN train like a BBer if they enjoy, but i think if your goals are just general fitness you dont NEED, just that.

59

[quote]Sagat wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Sagat wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Sagat wrote:

What difference does that make? I was a beginner who used a body part split routine. Are you saying that this should have been avoided?

This isn’t about martial arts or any other sport where the goal IS TO LEARN THAT SPORT OR ACTIVITY. This is about building muscle mass, and although you seem unaware, while minor issues like the number of sets or exercises might change, my overall “strategy” has not changed in several years.

Have you even tried thinking about this for yourself instead of repeating what you’ve read?

Is the bench press somehow a different movement for a 150lbs man than it is for a 250lbs man? No…it’s just heavier.

What routine have you seen that recommends 6 different full exercises for any one body part? I started doing 2-3 exercises and STILL do about 3 exercises per body part.

Do you actually know how this works?

I agree completly about the number exercises, when i use split routines or prescribe them i never do this much… but someone reads in some magazine that Arnold used to do 30 sets per body part, Arnold was huge, you see the conclusion…
About the average gym people, they CAN train like a BBer if they enjoy, but i think if your goals are just general fitness you dont NEED, just that.[/quote]

I couldn’t give a flying shit about the goals of someone who claims “general fitness”. To me, that is simply an excuse to look the same or worse 5 years from now.

I also doubt most of the people responding in this thread are seeing this from the perspective of someone who just wants to “tone and shape”.

60

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Sagat wrote:
jstreet0204 wrote:
Sagat wrote:
About, the tbt thing: as i mentioned i’m not against split routines, if i planned to go compete in bodybuilding that is how i would train. What i’m against is the notion that all training routines should be based in BB, when you see BBs, fighters, recreational lifters, begginers doing the same routine something is wrong. A BBer may need a lot of volume and intensity to grow so tbt is not pratical for him, but its hard to explain to a guy 50kgs lighter, have never lifted weights and plays soccer twice a week that tbt can be good for him (and you are not stupid for training him differently of a pro BBer).

Is this not the “Bodybuilding” forum?

I always understood (maybe i was wrong all this time) that it was more bodybuilding in the sense of building the body , building muscle and losing fat, than in the sense of the sport bodybuilding. I bet that most posting here will never step in a stage, probably 90% of the writers of this site arent bodybuilders…

In a old TC article he talks about the T-Nation ideal of being a guy who looks badass that makes nobody start trouble with him, but if someone is crazy enogh then you actually are badass to kick his butt or something like that… to me seems like this site doesnt follow a strict sense of the word bodybuilding, altough its still part of it. Dont get me wrong, i’m not one of these anti BB guys you see here, i even went to a BB show another day.

Dude, this is the BODYBUILDING fucking forum on a BODYBUILDING website. Yes, they focus on other sports as well, but that doesn’t erase where you are currently posting.

Bullshit like is why that T-Cell now exists. We don’t have to acknowledge every fucking sport on the planet in every conversation, especially in THIS forum.[/quote]

I’m not talking about sports, let me rephrase what i said: most people here build muscle and lose fat without competition in mind.