Different Kind of Routine. Would It Work?

Bigger Stronger Leaner
1

Hey guys,

So I have been reading a number of routines on this site for me. Like everyone I want to lose fat and gain mass.

My question is about the kind of routines posted here. I’ve noticed several have some type of concentrated split where on each day, you might do 3-4 sets of 8-12 reps and each day is highly focused on a group of muscles. something like:

chest/tri one day
back/bi one day
legs one day

my question is…why dont we really see full body workouts for every training day? something where on each day you might do 1 set of 8-12 reps (to your max) for every muscle 3-4x per week.

so in one day you would do bench, squat, rows, pull ups, leg curl, leg ext, military press, curls to get a full body workout and you would only do 1 set of each exercise to your MAX (that you could put up 8-12 times). seems like the intensity is there and with just 1 set, you get plenty of rest.

by doing this 3-4 days a week you are still putting up the same amount of total reps as you would in the other concentrated routines but with the added rest between reps, wouldnt you likely gain strength at a faster rate?

is something wrong with this plan? is it inefficient or something? wondering why its not really in many articles.

2

The idea of full body workouts (either training the largest bodyparts [back, chest, and legs] or training all bodyparts in every session) is probably one of the most debated topics on the forum, if not in the training world. Not sure how you haven’t stumbled across a discussion of it before.

[quote]bdiddy78 wrote:
my question is…why dont we really see full body workouts for every training day? something where on each day you might do 1 set of 8-12 reps (to your max) for every muscle 3-4x per week.

so in one day you would do bench, squat, rows, pull ups, leg curl, leg ext, military press, curls to get a full body workout and you would only do 1 set of each exercise to your MAX (that you could put up 8-12 times). seems like the intensity is there and with just 1 set, you get plenty of rest. [/quote]
High Intensity Training (HIT) is a method of training that generally advocates training something along these lines. There are some fans of it and a lot of people who disagree with the method. And it’s always muddled with confusing issues - how many “warm up sets” per bodypart and how hard should they be, how to close to (or beyond) failure is appropriate, how do you manage compound vs isolation exercises, what about exercise variations/“hitting the muscle from angles”, etc.

Gain strength fast? Absolutely not, because training to muscular failure in the 8-12 rep range is not the way to build strength. Would that method build size? Possibly, for a little while, and then you’d likely burn out and/or get injured.

Also, if you’re training calves with the same intensity and volume as your entire back, and you’re training biceps the same way you’re training quads, can you really expect long-term, balanced progress? Sooner or later (likely sooner), you’re going to reach a point where more stimulus is needed for continued results.

Since you can only do so much volume or intensity in each session, splitting the body into parts becomes necessary in order to train with an appropriate amount of volume and/or intensity per bodypart. I talked a little about this idea here:

3

What you talk about was popularized by Nautilus decades ago. It is designed to be used with machines that make it safe. Reaching failure with free weights is unsafe with many exercises unless you have a spotter. In the articles librairy you might look at Chad Waterbury who wrote a lot about full body training or a regular librairy he wrote: get huge…
It depends on goals, time available, etc…
Since i like training i do upper/lower split 6 days a bit like 3 days full body.