High frequency full body is best imo

[OldFartTom]

... where he admits this not being better than twice per week so I don't know why hes pushing more than double that.

It's like clothes washing detergent, yes their have been improvements in the formulation over the years but essentially it's wash detergent. However look how many are repackaged as "improved" or "new formula" etc. All of them are supposedly better than the others

Marketing!

[Filmbuff81]

Hes def not making up work outs but I don't know what his definition of FB is lol. Its kind of the same type of agenda as what these guys did with the volume studies. I think they are trying to push this type of high frequency training to sell books. I also think that if you train a muscle hard you only need twice per week frequency. After I train lower body I don't even think of training legs again the next day. It gets hammered with 8-10 heavy sets. So if an advanced lifter squats 405 for work sets twice per week, on top of the rest of his lower day, hes done. Any more added frequency is going to be half ass. I also have a post from Nippard's where he admits this not being better than twice per week so I don't know why hes pushing more than double that.

Ok so this what I’m trying to get at.

Nippard and helms aren’t saying squat heavy every day. Hell not even squat every day even if some of it’s light.

The whole thing is about spreading the same volume over the week to aid in recovery.

The whole body pretty much gets hit, but it’s not this insane notion or idea to do everything heavy everyday.

Having 2 Lower body days normally wrecks me, but spreading that same volume over 5 days does not.

And I’d argue the quality of sets is higher due to the spread out nature too.

[SuffolkPunch]

Ok so this what I’m trying to get at.

Nippard and helms aren’t saying squat heavy every day. Hell not even squat every day even if some of it’s light.

The whole thing is about spreading the same volume over the week to aid in recovery.

The whole body pretty much gets hit, but it’s not this insane notion or idea to do everything heavy everyday.

Having 2 Lower body days normally wrecks me, but spreading that same volume over 5 days does not.

And I’d argue the quality of sets is higher due to the spread out nature too.

Bit late to the party but that's totally my view too. I will have two compounds and three accessory lifts spread out through the week. Basically the same workload as a typical 'leg day' but distributed differently.

This is possible because there is no known "minimum" amount per session - or if there is, it's very low. And as you say, the instensity of each set on average is higher.

[Filmbuff81]

Bit late to the party but that's totally my view too. I will have two compounds and three accessory lifts spread out through the week. Basically the same workload as a typical 'leg day' but distributed differently.

This is possible because there is no known "minimum" amount per session - or if there is, it's very low. And as you say, the instensity of each set on average is higher.

I’d love for them to do a minimum threshold study just for interests sake.

I recall a study doing 1 set to failure can maintain gains. So I’d definitely agree it’s a pretty low threshold to meet.

[sooby]

Hes def not making up work outs but I don't know what his definition of FB is lol. Its kind of the same type of agenda as what these guys did with the volume studies. I think they are trying to push this type of high frequency training to sell books. I also think that if you train a muscle hard you only need twice per week frequency. After I train lower body I don't even think of training legs again the next day. It gets hammered with 8-10 heavy sets. So if an advanced lifter squats 405 for work sets twice per week, on top of the rest of his lower day, hes done. Any more added frequency is going to be half ass. I also have a post from Nippard's where he admits this not being better than twice per week so I don't know why hes pushing more than double that.

Eric Helms actually made a point about the definition of FB on his podcast. Alot of people tend to associate FB with training every single muscle on the body every workout session, which isn't what he does. He might hit chest, triceps, calves and quads one day but may not necessarily hit hams, glutes and back. He's still technically training his upper and lower body but certain muscles may not be trained with a lot of volume or is de-emphasized in that particular session. Also certain exercises like power cleans, deadlifts, certain strongman stuff you can't really classify as hitting a particular body part because they are more of a true body exercise.

You'll also hear on his podcasts too that he doesn't really push high frequency training per se. He's said that 2x a week according to studies for most people is probably superior to 1x a week training and anything beyond that is variable and may be goal dependent. Some people do better with higher frequency, some don't as well. Ofc he's a fan of the more full body approach to his training and he's trying to achieve multiple simultaneous goals.

Like for me as a personal example I did 6 sets of box squats for 6 reps each around 320-330 lbs at RPE 7-8. I was completely fine doing SSB squats the next day for 5 sets of 10. Provided the box squats were the only leg exercise I did that day and I'm more of an intermediate not an advanced lifter. But I think the notion that you cant train muscle groups 2 days in a row is a myth. There are adaptations of the Bulgarian method that take that more to the extreme and it works. Smolov Jr does it, granted some of these programs are not sustainable in the long run but the overarching point here is that it's all about how you manage your volume/intensity over the course of the week and frequency is simply a vehicle of that. It's why you'll see some powerlifters benching 4-5x a week or some only doing 2-3x a week, some bodybuilders doing 1x splits and some doing 2-3x splits, and all of them having success. Studies are great as tools but at the same token, especially as you get more advanced you may find that when it comes to certain attributes, you may be the outlier, or maybe a particular type of training is or isn't conducive to your lifestyle.

Bit late to the party but that's totally my view too. I will have two compounds and three accessory lifts spread out through the week. Basically the same workload as a typical 'leg day' but distributed differently.

This is possible because there is no known "minimum" amount per session - or if there is, it's very low. And as you say, the instensity of each set on average is higher.

This too, from an anecdotal perspective, people can at least maintain the vast majority of their gains just maybe doing 1-2 hard sets to failure per muscle group a week. We do know that many recommend at least 8 hard sets a week per muscle for the minimum dose of volume a week (pure novices could gain on less). You could split that 3x a week and I don't think there is anything showing that this would be inferior to say it was done 1 or 2x a week.

[TAWS6]

Ok so this what I’m trying to get at.

Nippard and helms aren’t saying squat heavy every day. Hell not even squat every day even if some of it’s light.
.

I get that but my point is that if you train hard (squat heavy in this example) twice per week you don't need that much frequency. When you crank up the frequency your intensity suffers compared to something less extreme. I've never been a fan of the extreme approaches to training though. There is def a minimum amount of volume required per session (for bodybuilding) as well and with very high frequency your volume per session also needs to be lowered. There are just too many cons to this type of training. I've tried it in the past, I made a mistake and learned from it. But if you enjoy what your doing then have at it. Hopefully you'll have better luck than I did.

Scoby, I figured his def of FB was stretched.

[Filmbuff81]

I get that but my point is that if you train hard (squat heavy in this example) twice per week you don't need that much frequency. When you crank up the frequency your intensity suffers compared to something less extreme. I've never been a fan of the extreme approaches to training though. There is def a minimum amount of volume required per session (for bodybuilding) as well and with very high frequency your volume per session also needs to be lowered. There are just too many cons to this type of training. I've tried it in the past, I made a mistake and learned from it. But if you enjoy what your doing then have at it. Hopefully you'll have better luck than I did.

Scoby, I figured his def of FB was stretched.

Your entire premise seems to be it didn’t work for you so everyone else is pushing an agenda.

Of course there’s a minimum per session volume, but’s it’s really damn low.

Also helms definition of FB, and nippard’s too, actually is full body but just not compounds for everything. Some days the isolation movements are hitting muscle groups.

It just doesn’t fit your definition of full body.

Yesterday I did

Squats
Incline dumbbell press
Lying leg curls
Lat Pulldowns
Curls
Cable crunch

Today I’m doing

Bench press
Cable flyes
Hip thrusts
Rows
Arnold press
Press downs
Shrugs

In what world would that not be considered full body?

Also you keep avoiding the main point of this.

You keep saying if someone squats heavy twice per week you don’t need that much frequency.

But nobody is saying squat 4 times a week like smolov.

I squat once a week, I do leg press once a week, I deadlift once a week, I hip thrust once a week and I have accessory movements.

2 heavy lower sessions a week kill me and my recovery deficit is large. The systemic fatigue can really mess with you.

You even say 6-8 heavy sets and you’re cooked. You apparently can recover well enough and do that twice a week. Awesome.

Myself and others cannot.

I had a back off week this week and 3 sets of 6 on squats and I’m smoked. And it’s a “light” week for me.

I used to squat he at 2-3 times a week and my recovery would always suffer.

Helms whole point of the FB training during prep was to minimize fatigue and now he’s training multiple disciplines he needs to train pretty close to FB.

I don’t think it’s fair if you to paint FB training as extreme.

Nippard and helms’ ideas on Full body are pretty nuanced and not extreme in the least.

They are logical methods to ensure progress at an advanced stage and not get beat up.

[TAWS6]

No it does work. Is it the most effective way to train? IMO no

Fb is not extreme if done 3 days a week. Yes 5 days is extreme imo.

Your second day is pretty much an upper day.

[Filmbuff81]

No it does work. Is it the most effective way to train? IMO no

Fb is not extreme if done 3 days a week. Yes 5 days is extreme imo.

Do you consider a PPL extreme?

[TAWS6]

Do you consider a PPL extreme?

As far as days per week? Yes

[Filmbuff81]

As far as days per week? Yes

so you reside strictly in the camp of 3-4 days a week?

What about a L/U/L/P/P?

[TAWS6]

so you reside strictly in the camp of 3-4 days a week?

What about a L/U/L/P/P?

I'm on board with any reasonable split honestly. I don't train with a UL+PPL split but I don't hate it. I think that if a split like that keeps someone consistent its a great idea as long as they are not a complete novice.

[Filmbuff81]

I'm on board with any reasonable split honestly. I don't train with a UL+PPL split but I don't hate it. I think that if a split like that keeps someone consistent its a great idea as long as they are not a complete novice.

Then by that logic you shouldn’t be against a well thought out 5x week full body split that guys like nippard, helms, and others have been discussing.

The volume and intensity aren’t insane and if it keeps someone consistent and recovered then there’s really no issue with it.

A novice shouldn’t do it, but an intermediate-advanced lifter who knows their capabilities can work a program like that without much issue.

It’s 1 less day than a PPL which you consider extreme and the volume and intensity are moderate.

[TAWS6]

It’s not comparable just because the amount of days are the same. The volume per workout and intensity are lower but the frequency is insane. One is twice per week frequency and the other is 5. Like I said, come back in a year and all these guys will jump off the non sense train after they sell their e books. I just saw nippards new video selling his new programs. Lol

[Filmbuff81]

But frequency is only 1 variable.

Volume and intensity play a massive role.

Also in a PPL the shoulders get hit 4x a week from the push and pull days.

Back gets hit even on lower body days.

In an U/L/P/P/L things are realistically getting hit 3-4x week on upper body.


What about Olympic lifters? Basically doing full body every single day. You don’t see them crumbling to pieces and you can’t claim because it’s mainly concentric work.

Take nippard out of the equation and the whole fact he’s selling a program.

[TAWS6]

I was only talking about bodybuilding. When frequency gets stupid volume and intensity will take a hit over time. That’s why programs like dog crap training, 5/3/1 bbb, GBR etc have been around for so long. Which is what I’ve been suggesting forever to begin with.

[Filmbuff81]

I was only talking about bodybuilding. When frequency gets stupid volume and intensity will take a hit over time. That’s why programs like dog crap training, 5/3/1 bbb, GBR etc have been around for so long. Which is what I’ve been suggesting forever to begin with.

But my point is that WL and PL use waaaaaaay higher intensities than bodybuilding on average and will have some pretty high frequency usually without much issue.

So bodybuilding which has a much lower injury rate won’t really have as much of a problem.

Also 5/3/1 these days is basically full body 4x a week.

Also dog crap has to be low frequency due to the intensity techniques used on every exercise.

Edit:

Anyway I’m Bowing out. For anyone wanting to try 5x week it’s not gonna kill you, but you should be more advanced to understand your recovery abilities.

Any split can work contrary to what some will say.

[MSammon]

I’m sceptical because I’ve heard several reputable sources saying you can’t have high frequency, volume and intensity. Plus it makes sense that the middle frequency (twice per week) is probably best for most people?

[supramax]

I do this six days a week but with 8 singles on every lift. It's worked very great so far and its nearly been a year. I love it. I'm done with rep work and have been for nearly a year now. Singles for life in my opinion.

Interesting. Are the 8 singles for each exercise the same weight or does the weight increase or decrease? What about the warm up for each exercise? What exercises do you do?

[SuffolkPunch]

I’m sceptical because I’ve heard several reputable sources saying you can’t have high frequency, volume and intensity. Plus it makes sense that the middle frequency (twice per week) is probably best for most people?

People who say that are usually assuming that you increase the frequency but keep the same volume per session. This is not the case, you keep volume the same but spread out amongst more sessions.

The whole point is that volume is the key driver of hypertrophy so you have to pay attention to that. Frequency however, is a matter of preference that you are free to play around with.

Note that volume and intensity (or more accurately: exertion) are intertwined, you can't separate them and you can't calculate volume as simply as reps x sets x weight without some implict assumption about exertion levels in each set.

[MSammon]

People who say that are usually assuming that you increase the frequency but keep the same volume per session. This is not the case, you keep volume the same but spread out amongst more sessions.

The whole point is that volume is the key driver of hypertrophy so you have to pay attention to that. Frequency however, is a matter of preference that you are free to play around with.

Note that volume and intensity (or more accurately: exertion) are intertwined, you can't separate them and you can't calculate volume as simply as reps x sets x weight without some implict assumption about exertion levels in each set.

But isn’t there a minimal volume to work the muscle per session rather than just dividing it up in as many sessions as you please?

[sooby]

But isn’t there a minimal volume to work the muscle per session rather than just dividing it up in as many sessions as you please?

nope

[MSammon]

nope

Okay I don’t find that too surprising. What about rest periods then? Do you divide up the rest as well so more frequency and the same weekly volume then also less rest per muscle group between sessions but the same weekly rest?

[Filmbuff81]

Okay I don’t find that too surprising. What about rest periods then? Do you divide up the rest as well so more frequency and the same weekly volume then also less rest per muscle group between sessions but the same weekly rest?

If you look at Nippards new video he shows a layout you can do.

It’ll give you an idea how to structure.

Delts get hit pretty much every day, but they are small muscles so they recover fast

Chest gets hit for a couple days and then rest for a day or so.

Legs get hit hard to start the week and then more isolation as the week progresses.

Also big compound movements have a weekly undulating model.

So some weeks are heavy and others are light.

Edit: I just saw your thread on your beginner routine.

At your stage there’s no need for you to do a 5x full body split. Your lifts aren’t in a place where you need to be worrying about structuring your lifts to minimize fatigue.

[MSammon]

If you look at Nippards new video he shows a layout you can do.

It’ll give you an idea how to structure.

Delts get hit pretty much every day, but they are small muscles so they recover fast

Chest gets hit for a couple days and then rest for a day or so.

Legs get hit hard to start the week and then more isolation as the week progresses.

Also big compound movements have a weekly undulating model.

So some weeks are heavy and others are light.

Edit: I just saw your thread on your beginner routine.

At your stage there’s no need for you to do a 5x full body split. Your lifts aren’t in a place where you need to be worrying about structuring your lifts to minimize fatigue.

Thanks yes I have no plans to workout more than 4 days a week yet. Sometimes I only get in 3 days.