How about this workout?

[musketeer]

Anyone for dips instead of close grips?

 

[Madcow2]

Inform me to why you like his original routine more.
The first workout prioritizes his triceps over his back, shoulders and hams. Additionally, do you think someone could completely recover on this routine, assuming he is not utilizing heavy anabolics?

So there is a benefit to frequency aside from all other variables (volume/intensity) meaning, take the same volume and spread over 2 days during the week (meaning do not increase the volume - we aren't talking double the load) and you will progress much faster than 1x. Training a muscle 1x per week runs straight into a detraining effect - this is proven. I know this is the way common BBing programs are layed out but believe me they arrived at this through ignorant misapplication because they didn't really understand what was going on and they used overtraining in a single factor theory framework to make these changes which was very logical except that single factor/supercompensation isn't right and when this change was going on in BBing the whole world already knew it wasn't right but nobody bothered to ask or look. The whole world designs programs much differently under dual factor theory. When I say whole world, I mean among every serious strength coach (this job includes adding LBM to athletes in a time constrained environment) and researcher around the globe at the highest levels there is virtually universal consensus.

Anyway, here is a post I wrote on the subject specifically explaining how BBers arrived at the 1x per week method. Post #234 on this page http://www.elitefitness.com/forum/showthread.php?t=375215&page=12&pp=20

You might also check out the post immediately below it. There is a link to an entertaining interview with Glenn Pendlay who I happen to think pretty darn sharp when it comes to this stuff. His lifters routinely squat 3x per week and pull 5 days, make huge gains and do it all clean.

This thread has a lot in it but the first page is primarily an illustration of a program based on dual factor theory. It was designed by one of the best strength coaches ever - Bill Starr, and has been used in one form or another for over 30 years. There is really not much out there that can compare in inducing hypertrophy.http://www.elitefitness.com/forum/showthread.php?t=375215

 

[musketeer]

I think dips would go better than close grips.

 

[Madcow2]

Im going to do this for 4 weeks at least, any suggestions or comments are appreciated. Ill be alternating the workouts, lifting Tues, Thurs, and Sat.

Workout 1
Squats – 5x8
Close Grip Bench – 4x8
Pull Ups – 2x8 Wide grip
2x8 Close grip
Shoulder Press – 4x8
SLDL – 3x10

Workout 2
Deadlifts - 1x10, 1x8, 1x6, 1x4, 1x2
Incline Bench – 4x8
Bent Over Row – 5x5
Seated Row – 4x8
Shrugs – 4x8

I like the exercise selection for the most part. Forget seated rows - you already have BB rows which are 100x the exercise anyway. I know I harp on it but regular shrugs are a piss waste. If you are going to do any type of shrugging it should be dynamic pulling and the best for trap/upper back development (providing you are already doing DLs and Rows) is the power shrug. This post has links that cover both. The best way to do BB rows and how to perform the power shrug. http://www.elitefitness.com/forum/showpost.php?p=4497720&postcount=14

The main issue though is your training experience. With a post asking about program design I'm guessing you are a novice but if you've been at this hard for a couple of years exercises, sets and reps = a routine not a program. And routines are just that, short lived and shitty. In a program, intensity/volume/frequency are regulated to provide a stimulus over a period. For newer lifters it's a wash because they respond well to just getting in the gym, lifting hard, and eating but for an experienced lifter it's just not enough to go in and work hard - you need a plan.

 

[BlondBomber]

So there is a benefit to frequency aside from all other variables (volume/intensity) meaning, take the same volume and spread over 2 days during the week (meaning do not increase the volume - we aren't talking double the load) and you will progress much faster than 1x. Training a muscle 1x per week runs straight into a detraining effect - this is proven. I know this is the way common BBing programs are layed out but believe me they arrived at this through ignorant misapplication because they didn't really understand what was going on and they used overtraining in a single factor theory framework to make these changes which was very logical except that single factor/supercompensation isn't right and when this change was going on in BBing the whole world already knew it wasn't right but nobody bothered to ask or look. The whole world designs programs much differently under dual factor theory. When I say whole world, I mean among every serious strength coach (this job includes adding LBM to athletes in a time constrained environment) and researcher around the globe at the highest levels there is virtually universal consensus.

Anyway, here is a post I wrote on the subject specifically explaining how BBers arrived at the 1x per week method. Post #234 on this page http://www.elitefitness.com/forum/showthread.php?t=375215&page=12&pp=20

You might also check out the post immediately below it. There is a link to an entertaining interview with Glenn Pendlay who I happen to think pretty darn sharp when it comes to this stuff. His lifters routinely squat 3x per week and pull 5 days, make huge gains and do it all clean.

This thread has a lot in it but the first page is primarily an illustration of a program based on dual factor theory. It was designed by one of the best strength coaches ever - Bill Starr, and has been used in one form or another for over 30 years. There is really not much out there that can compare in inducing hypertrophy.http://www.elitefitness.com/forum/showthread.php?t=375215

As to not open a can of worms, I will simply bow out. We are like different denominations of the same religion. I subscribe to a certain school of thought, and you another, so this exchange will not be productive. You have the respect of a lot of members, so I will respect you also.
Though, I do want to add that Louie Simmons is the greatest strength coach ever and has contributed more to strength training in America than any other single person. That is just my opinion.

 

[Madcow2]

As to not open a can of worms, I will simply bow out. We are like different denominations of the same religion. I subscribe to a certain school of thought, and you another, so this exchange will not be productive. You have the respect of a lot of members, so I will respect you also.
Though, I do want to add that Louie Simmons is the greatest strength coach ever and has contributed more to strength training in America than any other single person. That is just my opinion.

I'm never concerned with disagreement despite the fact that I am a bit passionate about training knowledge. I don't hold training as a religion or anything (as a matter of fact disagreement about religion is pretty natural too - one would think imperfect humans might pick up on that after a few thousand years and just live in peace - anyway). The real bummer is when people have never heard of something or don't understand it. That's why I take time to put it all down. If someone reads through, gets an understanding of how it works and then disagrees or chooses not to try or implement for whatever reason, I'm 100% supportive. If everybody always did the same thing and didn't think for themselves we'd have no innovation at all. I just wanted to get that out in case you or anyone thinks I'm a zealot about this or something. Bodybuilding is almost entirely single factor based and despite whatever else is out there one can certainly train accordingly, but it's a crime to never explore and understand the options and those options have been all but invisible to the general weight training populace for a long time now.

My goal is to take what is done in the rest of the world and bring it to people who can benefit. If you look at PL, Louie was the real innovator there. Pure PL training was largely pretty garbage for a long time but he sat back and started reading and taking ideas from the soviet and eastern eurpoean researchers (largely based on OL and assistance for athletics) and synthesized those along with his own innovations to create a dedicated PL program. I don't know that I'd call him the greatest all around strength coach simply because I'd want to see consistent verifiable success at top levels outside PL, but for PL specific - it's hard to argue that there's anyone better or anyone who has done more. If you are ever interested in the sources he used many of the authors' and researchers' names are contained in here along with a list of books - all available from Dave Tate's site www.elitefts.com. These being some of the better ones:
A System of Multi Year Training in Weightlifting
Fundmentals of Special Strength Training in Sport
Supertraining
Managing the Training of Weightlifters
Science and Practice of Strength Training
http://www.elitefitness.com/forum/showpost.php?p=4323293&postcount=3

 

[musketeer]

not me.
dips are hard on the shoulders. i think as an occasional change of pace its ok, but i think close grips or reverse grip benching is better.

Reverse grip benching is just plain wrong.

Dip were always hard on my shoulders until I made the effort to get good at them. I think that when you are a beginner dips will hurt your shoulders, but when you advance to a higher level dips become a very productive exercise. If you cant strengthen the shoulders enough to do dips then you probably will never get past the beginner level.

 

[view]

As to not open a can of worms, I will simply bow out. We are like different denominations of the same religion. I subscribe to a certain school of thought, and you another, so this exchange will not be productive. You have the respect of a lot of members, so I will respect you also.
Though, I do want to add that Louie Simmons is the greatest strength coach ever and has contributed more to strength training in America than any other single person. That is just my opinion.

but what if there was a religion that allowed you to make better gains with less effort?

 

[doubles1]

No flames here, but I don't understand why anyone would use such a routine.

Why not try the most basic 4 day split:

Day One-Chest/Biceps
1. bench press
2. incline press
3. dips
4. BB curls
5. hammer curls

Day Two-Quads/Hams
1. squats
2. leg press
3. leg ext.
4. stiff-legged deadlifts
5. leg curls

Day Three-Delts/Triceps
1. military press
2. lateral raises
3. bent-over raises
4. BB extensions
5. pushdowns

Day Four-Back/Calves
1. deadlifts
2. pull-ups
3. BB rows
4. T-bar rows
5. BB shrugs
6. calf raises
7. seated calf raises

This split would allow you to hammer each muscle group hard once a week and I believe you will see greater gains.

Just a thought.

Thats my workout almost to a Tee-....the initial workout posted i would never do IMO ...but to each his own...

i like what you have there bro...
danks.

 

[BlondBomber]

Thats my workout almost to a Tee-....the initial workout posted i would never do IMO ...but to each his own...

i like what you have there bro...
danks.

Thanks. My current routine is a little more exotic, but when I do actually bulk, I will use that protocol.
What rep/set schemes do you use?