Vanchatron
Banned
OK after reading up on some articles/threads etc & reading advice from knowledgeable people on the forum, they all suggest that training a bodypart once per week is not as good as twice per week. The reason for this being that if your diet is good then a muscle "should" recover within 2-3 days. If you only train a bodypart once per week then it recovers within a few days & it's just sitting there doing nothing for the next 4 days or so, until you train it again.
Therefore, if you're not on steroids you lose the anabolic response in that muscle & like I said above, it's just doing nothing for days (whereas if you are on AAS, the steroids keep the anabolic response going whether or not you are training the muscle so twice per week isn't necessary). Obviously not the best way to grow.
If you train twice per week, then the muscle recovers within 2-3 days and by the time it's recovered you are training it again, so that you keep the muscle working & the anabolic response present. I'm not sure if training a major bodypart such as Chest/Back/Legs requires twice per week training but smaller bodyparts such as Biceps/Triceps/Shoulders etc may do.
Because of this, I was wondering whether you guys think changing from this routine:
To this one, will yield better results:
This way, Biceps/Triceps/Shoulders get hit more than once per week, therefore keeping them active & the anabolism present. Chest/Back/Legs still only get hit once per week, but I feel seeing as they're big muscles, they need more time to recover than the smaller ones, therefore once per week should be sufficient.
I also have another question. As I strictly train 3x a week to allow for recovery etc, I'm a little concerned that IF I was to train like this, my triceps would effectively be getting hit 3x a week as opposed to twice like in the first routine. The reason for this being that they get hit indirectly on monday with Chest, directly on Wednesday & indirectly again on Friday with shoulders (military press). This would mean that my shoulders are also getting hit 3x a week. Do you think I have any reason for concern or should I be fine providing my diet/sleep etc is intact?
Thanks guys, and I'll await your responses.
Therefore, if you're not on steroids you lose the anabolic response in that muscle & like I said above, it's just doing nothing for days (whereas if you are on AAS, the steroids keep the anabolic response going whether or not you are training the muscle so twice per week isn't necessary). Obviously not the best way to grow.
If you train twice per week, then the muscle recovers within 2-3 days and by the time it's recovered you are training it again, so that you keep the muscle working & the anabolic response present. I'm not sure if training a major bodypart such as Chest/Back/Legs requires twice per week training but smaller bodyparts such as Biceps/Triceps/Shoulders etc may do.
Because of this, I was wondering whether you guys think changing from this routine:
- Chest/Triceps
- Off
- Back/Biceps
- Off
- Legs/Shoulders
To this one, will yield better results:
- Chest/Biceps
- Off
- Back/Triceps
- Off
- Legs/Shoulders
This way, Biceps/Triceps/Shoulders get hit more than once per week, therefore keeping them active & the anabolism present. Chest/Back/Legs still only get hit once per week, but I feel seeing as they're big muscles, they need more time to recover than the smaller ones, therefore once per week should be sufficient.
I also have another question. As I strictly train 3x a week to allow for recovery etc, I'm a little concerned that IF I was to train like this, my triceps would effectively be getting hit 3x a week as opposed to twice like in the first routine. The reason for this being that they get hit indirectly on monday with Chest, directly on Wednesday & indirectly again on Friday with shoulders (military press). This would mean that my shoulders are also getting hit 3x a week. Do you think I have any reason for concern or should I be fine providing my diet/sleep etc is intact?
Thanks guys, and I'll await your responses.