Muscle and Brawn Forums

Muscle and Brawn Forums (http://www.muscleandbrawn.com/forum/index.php)
-   Muscle Building and Bodybuilding (http://www.muscleandbrawn.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=37)
-   -   Who built a great body with full body workouts? (http://www.muscleandbrawn.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11113)

abett07 09-14-2012 09:57 PM

Who built a great body with full body workouts?
 
First of I want to say sorry for once gain repeating a stupid comment made by a trainer at my gym as I did not want to do this again however I just could not let this one go. Today I was told this by a trainer

“Full body workouts are such a terrible way to train, no one is going get a great body on a full body routine “

Please give me some examples of people who have used full body workouts to build an awesome physique and that you are almost certain did not use steroids

Thanks for any response

kitarpyar 09-14-2012 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by abett07 (Post 276763)
First of I want to say sorry for once gain repeating a stupid comment made by a trainer at my gym as I did not want to do this again however I just could not let this one go. Today I was told this by a trainer

“Full body workouts are such a terrible way to train, no one is going get a great body on a full body routine “

Please give me some examples of people who have used full body workouts to build an awesome physique and that you are almost certain did not use steroids

Thanks for any response

Most classic bodybuilders till 1950s, before the steroid era used full body routines. Here's a sampling of the better known bodybuilders from that era.

John Grimek
http://imageshack.us/a/img692/2356/grimek.jpg

Reg Parks
http://imageshack.us/a/img831/6710/parksg.jpg

Steve Reeves
http://imageshack.us/a/img580/6734/reevesy.jpg

Clarence Ross
http://imageshack.us/a/img694/434/rossm.jpg

Alan Stephan
http://imageshack.us/a/img89/9291/stephanh.jpg

Jack Delinger
http://imageshack.us/a/img109/6191/jackdelinger2.jpg

George Eifferman
http://imageshack.us/a/img825/4946/georgeeiferman1.jpg

Dick Dubois (if I am not mistaken, at least while he trained with Reeves)
http://imageshack.us/a/img560/7382/dubois.jpg

Manohar Aich (picture at the age of 94)
http://imageshack.us/a/img687/6509/2008071952820401.jpg

And even sweet baby Arnold - starting out, before getting on roids, Arnold idolized Reg Parks and followed 5x5 routines. Evidently, they worked pretty well for him too, as evidenced by his photographs at the age of 17
http://imageshack.us/a/img338/2717/arnold1w.jpg

Amongst the modern day natties, Tony Montalbano trains almost exclusively on full body routines, especially during the off season.
http://imageshack.us/a/img405/5016/tonymont.jpg

BendtheBar 09-14-2012 10:34 PM

Glad you mentioned Arnold. Even the now infamous "Arnold routine" looked more like a mutated fullbody than a modern split.

I believe Arnold had 19" arms by the age of 19. I am speculating based on picture that he had built 80% of his mass before he had moved beyond basic programs.

abett07 09-14-2012 11:32 PM

if someone uses a fullbody workout does it mean that they are almost certainly not on steroids?

kitarpyar 09-14-2012 11:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by abett07 (Post 276775)
if someone uses a fullbody workout does it mean that they are almost certainly not on steroids?

Not necessarily.

BendtheBar 09-15-2012 12:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by abett07 (Post 276775)
if someone uses a fullbody workout does it mean that they are almost certainly not on steroids?

Absolutely not.

Hard work is hard work is hard work. If you work your tail off you'll gain on nearly any program. The program is not the magic. People obsess about the minutiae of programming way too much.

Modern bodybuilding has become all about beating the snot out of bodyparts. It works, but that doesn't mean if 99% of these guys were born into fullbody era that they wouldn't be just as big. They would because they train hard, listen to their bodies and evolve their training.

Because it has become the norm to hit each bodypart with a lot of work, bodybuilders require more rest between training days. It's not just the muscles being demolished, but the joints, connective tissue, etc.

I guarantee if you forced them to use fullbodies they would modify these workouts in ways to get the same results. They would do what it took, with focus and intensity, and get it done.

Look at DC training...it's nothing more than a simple A/B split. It's low volume, 3 days per week, but uses rest pause to up the ante'. A lot of guys are getting huge off DC training. Is it magic? No. What DC training reveals is that if you work hard, you might not need a bazillion sets per bodypart after all - and that frequency might actually be an option.

I want to repeat...people obsess way too much about splits and the minor parts of programming that really don't matter (yet). People who are successful are dedicated, work hard, have attention to detail, modify diet and training to fit their needs, and would succeed in just about any era.

I have interviewed over 100 natural bodybuilders in the last 3-4 years and not a single one uses fullbody workouts. Why? because they are simply not in the magazines. But they are making a strong comeback on the Internet, as is basic training. Balance is being restored because there are more voices.

We as lifters need to stop thinking in terms of fullbody vs. splits and start viewing them in their proper context. Newbs need frequency, form practice and can recover more quickly because of the low relative intensity. They don't need 10 pound flyes or dumbbell laterals. They don't need to bomb, blitz and blast every muscle from every angle using every possible machine and piece of equipment in the gym. They can barely lift a dumbbell without getting DOMS, and can gain doing just about anything if they progress and eat enough. They need to build stability, learn form, and build some semblance of strength. This is just common sense.

Fundamentals and basics first. Build a base, like every other hobby and sport. Marathoners don't start running 10 miles per day. There are many variables at play here. Different recovery needs and demands for different skill levels, form levels, recovery levels, strength levels, whatever levels.

If any trainer doesn't see this, or understand this, ignore them. End of story. They have their heads in a dark hole.

I don't believe it's an either/or question. I believe that both have a time and a place, but they shouldn't be forced. We shouldn't just hop around to programs for random reasons...now I can lift X, I must do a split. Wouldn't it make more sense to base changes on current needs? I think so.

Whatever programming evolves into, it evolves into. Every advanced lifter trains different. They aren't concerned with what programming looks like on paper, nor do most arbitrarily align things for dogmatic reasons. They might stick to splits, but they are highly modified to fit individual needs.

Think...start simple, evolve based on needs.

themaster2981 09-15-2012 07:49 AM

I am reasonably new to powerlifting, the first routine I followed was a split routine, 3 days a week, 3 different lifts and related assistance exercises. I followed it for good 14 weeks and that is good time spent for a single routine. I am still experimenting. I achieved my goals through hard work during the split routine.

Now I am following a different routine, 3 days week, all 3 lifts everyday. I am in my 4th week now and the initial cycle is of 8 weeks. I must say, that the new full body training routine is more challenging and more rewarding. This is my personal opinion. I do not know on what basis your trainer commented that "full body routines are not useful".
What must be kept in mind is that, you will gain as long you work hard and keep your nutrition right, depending on the goals.

If you intend to follow a full body routine, you can find many online, I am sure.

Happy Lifting

70sBB 09-17-2012 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kitarpyar (Post 276765)
Most classic bodybuilders till 1950s, before the steroid era used full body routines. Here's a sampling of the better known bodybuilders from that era.

John Grimek
http://imageshack.us/a/img692/2356/grimek.jpg

Reg Parks
http://imageshack.us/a/img831/6710/parksg.jpg

Steve Reeves
http://imageshack.us/a/img580/6734/reevesy.jpg

Clarence Ross
http://imageshack.us/a/img694/434/rossm.jpg

Alan Stephan
http://imageshack.us/a/img89/9291/stephanh.jpg

Jack Delinger
http://imageshack.us/a/img109/6191/jackdelinger2.jpg

George Eifferman
http://imageshack.us/a/img825/4946/georgeeiferman1.jpg

Dick Dubois (if I am not mistaken, at least while he trained with Reeves)
http://imageshack.us/a/img560/7382/dubois.jpg

Manohar Aich (picture at the age of 94)
http://imageshack.us/a/img687/6509/2008071952820401.jpg

And even sweet baby Arnold - starting out, before getting on roids, Arnold idolized Reg Parks and followed 5x5 routines. Evidently, they worked pretty well for him too, as evidenced by his photographs at the age of 17
http://imageshack.us/a/img338/2717/arnold1w.jpg

Amongst the modern day natties, Tony Montalbano trains almost exclusively on full body routines, especially during the off season.
http://imageshack.us/a/img405/5016/tonymont.jpg

Rep +

WilldBill88 09-17-2012 11:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BendtheBar (Post 276780)
Absolutely not.

Hard work is hard work is hard work. If you work your tail off you'll gain on nearly any program. The program is not the magic. People obsess about the minutiae of programming way too much.

Modern bodybuilding has become all about beating the snot out of bodyparts. It works, but that doesn't mean if 99% of these guys were born into fullbody era that they wouldn't be just as big. They would because they train hard, listen to their bodies and evolve their training.

Because it has become the norm to hit each bodypart with a lot of work, bodybuilders require more rest between training days. It's not just the muscles being demolished, but the joints, connective tissue, etc.

I guarantee if you forced them to use fullbodies they would modify these workouts in ways to get the same results. They would do what it took, with focus and intensity, and get it done.

Look at DC training...it's nothing more than a simple A/B split. It's low volume, 3 days per week, but uses rest pause to up the ante'. A lot of guys are getting huge off DC training. Is it magic? No. What DC training reveals is that if you work hard, you might not need a bazillion sets per bodypart after all - and that frequency might actually be an option.

I want to repeat...people obsess way too much about splits and the minor parts of programming that really don't matter (yet). People who are successful are dedicated, work hard, have attention to detail, modify diet and training to fit their needs, and would succeed in just about any era.

I have interviewed over 100 natural bodybuilders in the last 3-4 years and not a single one uses fullbody workouts. Why? because they are simply not in the magazines. But they are making a strong comeback on the Internet, as is basic training. Balance is being restored because there are more voices.

We as lifters need to stop thinking in terms of fullbody vs. splits and start viewing them in their proper context. Newbs need frequency, form practice and can recover more quickly because of the low relative intensity. They don't need 10 pound flyes or dumbbell laterals. They don't need to bomb, blitz and blast every muscle from every angle using every possible machine and piece of equipment in the gym. They can barely lift a dumbbell without getting DOMS, and can gain doing just about anything if they progress and eat enough. They need to build stability, learn form, and build some semblance of strength. This is just common sense.

Fundamentals and basics first. Build a base, like every other hobby and sport. Marathoners don't start running 10 miles per day. There are many variables at play here. Different recovery needs and demands for different skill levels, form levels, recovery levels, strength levels, whatever levels.

If any trainer doesn't see this, or understand this, ignore them. End of story. They have their heads in a dark hole.

I don't believe it's an either/or question. I believe that both have a time and a place, but they shouldn't be forced. We shouldn't just hop around to programs for random reasons...now I can lift X, I must do a split. Wouldn't it make more sense to base changes on current needs? I think so.

Whatever programming evolves into, it evolves into. Every advanced lifter trains different. They aren't concerned with what programming looks like on paper, nor do most arbitrarily align things for dogmatic reasons. They might stick to splits, but they are highly modified to fit individual needs.

Think...start simple, evolve based on needs.

Great answer!

bamazav 09-18-2012 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BendtheBar (Post 276780)
Absolutely not.

Hard work is hard work is hard work. If you work your tail off you'll gain on nearly any program. The program is not the magic. People obsess about the minutiae of programming way too much.

Modern bodybuilding has become all about beating the snot out of bodyparts. It works, but that doesn't mean if 99% of these guys were born into fullbody era that they wouldn't be just as big. They would because they train hard, listen to their bodies and evolve their training.

Because it has become the norm to hit each bodypart with a lot of work, bodybuilders require more rest between training days. It's not just the muscles being demolished, but the joints, connective tissue, etc.

I guarantee if you forced them to use fullbodies they would modify these workouts in ways to get the same results. They would do what it took, with focus and intensity, and get it done.

Look at DC training...it's nothing more than a simple A/B split. It's low volume, 3 days per week, but uses rest pause to up the ante'. A lot of guys are getting huge off DC training. Is it magic? No. What DC training reveals is that if you work hard, you might not need a bazillion sets per bodypart after all - and that frequency might actually be an option.

I want to repeat...people obsess way too much about splits and the minor parts of programming that really don't matter (yet). People who are successful are dedicated, work hard, have attention to detail, modify diet and training to fit their needs, and would succeed in just about any era.

I have interviewed over 100 natural bodybuilders in the last 3-4 years and not a single one uses fullbody workouts. Why? because they are simply not in the magazines. But they are making a strong comeback on the Internet, as is basic training. Balance is being restored because there are more voices.

We as lifters need to stop thinking in terms of fullbody vs. splits and start viewing them in their proper context. Newbs need frequency, form practice and can recover more quickly because of the low relative intensity. They don't need 10 pound flyes or dumbbell laterals. They don't need to bomb, blitz and blast every muscle from every angle using every possible machine and piece of equipment in the gym. They can barely lift a dumbbell without getting DOMS, and can gain doing just about anything if they progress and eat enough. They need to build stability, learn form, and build some semblance of strength. This is just common sense.

Fundamentals and basics first. Build a base, like every other hobby and sport. Marathoners don't start running 10 miles per day. There are many variables at play here. Different recovery needs and demands for different skill levels, form levels, recovery levels, strength levels, whatever levels.

If any trainer doesn't see this, or understand this, ignore them. End of story. They have their heads in a dark hole.

I don't believe it's an either/or question. I believe that both have a time and a place, but they shouldn't be forced. We shouldn't just hop around to programs for random reasons...now I can lift X, I must do a split. Wouldn't it make more sense to base changes on current needs? I think so.

Whatever programming evolves into, it evolves into. Every advanced lifter trains different. They aren't concerned with what programming looks like on paper, nor do most arbitrarily align things for dogmatic reasons. They might stick to splits, but they are highly modified to fit individual needs.

Think...start simple, evolve based on needs.

Can you sticky a single post?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:03 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.