Background: I've been workout out off and on for about a year and a half (about 50/50). I did the first 5 months of HGM and then got busy at a new job (construction) and quit working out for about 2 months.
So I started working out again about 3 weeks ago with this 5x5 program:
Fri: Deadlifts, Bent over rows, Squats, Weighted lunges
(Originally I wanted to do a 4 day split with legs and back both on their own day - but I don't have enough time yet)
My workout on any given day takes about 40 minutes with 1 min inbetween sets.
This all being said... Mon and Fri are awesome workouts that kick my arse good, but wed don't give me the same "pump". I feel good afterwards, but more wore out than the other days.
Any thoughts as to if I may be missing or overlooking something? I'd love for wed to be as great as the others.
My opinion from experiance and articles is it is probably more beneficial to avoid such splits that result in infrequent stimulation of the muscle fibers. Full body or upper/lower splits may be better. You'll get a better pump and with the frequency (atleast a days rest between muscle groups) you should make better results, whether your goal is hypertrophy or strength, or a combination.
Also replace some bencing with dips. Take out some pulldowns and try pull ups. Im sure others will give some feedback, but check through the FAQ section for professionaly designed work outs.
Right now, im doing waterbury method and loving it if you want to check it out: http://www.t-nation.com/readTopic.do...ydra?id=534922
You have 35 sets of internal rotation exercises and 5 sets of external rotation. That is really setting yourself up for a problem.
If you search for the Bill Starr program either here or just online its a 3 day a week 5x5 program that is pretty good.
Either that or scrap the days you have now and set it up a bit different. You really don't need three types of bench press and 4 types of pulldowns, its just overkill.
Workout A:
Superset: Squat & Bench
Superset: Row and Lunge
Ab/core exercise: Swiss Ball or Incline situp, or Hanging leg raise
Workout B:
Superset: Deadlift & Chinup/pullup
Superset: Press & Bulgarian Split Squat
Ab/core rotation: Russian twist of some sort, or low/high or high/low wood chopper
Just keep alternating A and B workouts. Vary reps/volume/intensity, depending on goals. For general purposes:
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You have 35 sets of internal rotation exercises and 5 sets of external rotation. That is really setting yourself up for a problem.
[/ QUOTE ]
Can you define the difference for me?
[/ QUOTE ]
Internal rotation is anything that internally rotates the humerus (upper arm). So basically almost anything that primarily hits the chest or lats. External rotation is anything that externally rotates the upper arm or anything that hits the midback (traps, rhomboids, external rotators of the shoulder).
The two vertical movements are also greatly imbalanced. Though vertical pushes and vertical pulls are not directly antagonistic to each other (unlike biceps and triceps) balance between the two movements is important for healthy shoulders, including scapular stability and control.
I know some would argue that lunges may be considered hip dominant [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] but since I consider them quad dominant you can see another imbalance right there. It is a rare thing that people need to focus on their quads more than their hamstrings, it is more usual that people need to focus more on getting their hamstrings up to snuff.
-
For completeness, in order to determine whether your program is balanced you would need consider other issues such as:
shoulder presses with dumbbells (this would make it a unilateral exercise) and compare it with your pulldowns (which would appear to be conducted bilaterally)
same with bench presses (with barbell this would be bilateral, with dumbell unilateral) compared with bent over row (same bilateral/unilateral considerations)
That's enough to be getting on with. Thinking of movements really helps to focus the mind on balance within a program, much easier than thinking of individual muscles.