Multiple times per week vs demolishing a muscle once a week. - JP Fitness Forums

Cynic · 07-09-2006, 09:34 PM

I'm on another forum and there is a 15yr old that is following the dogma of body-part splits and annihilating a particular muscle once a week with multiple exercises. Now the last I heard is that weekly frequency will do more for a person's gains than the old body-part split and once a week methodology.

However, I'm not a CSCS (or certified anything), kinesiologist or exercise physiologist, so I have difficulty eplaining this to him is anything other than my word and would like to ask the elders (meant only in the most respectful way, honestly) if they can comment on this.

Mind you, this is for a 15 yr old, so analogy linked to the science would work better. Think in terms of Carl Sagen.

bipennate · 07-09-2006, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynic

I'm on another forum and there is a 15yr old that is following the dogma of body-part splits and annihilating a particular muscle once a week with multiple exercises. Now the last I heard is that weekly frequency will do more for a person's gains than the old body-part split and once a week methodology.

However, I'm not a CSCS (or certified anything), kinesiologist or exercise physiologist, so I have difficulty eplaining this to him is anything other than my word and would like to ask the elders (meant only in the most respectful way, honestly) if they can comment on this.

Mind you, this is for a 15 yr old, so analogy linked to the science would work better. Think in terms of Carl Sagen.

Which forum?

Cynic · 07-09-2006, 11:16 PM

Sorry, bad wording, it's a whole other site/board: http://www.fitness.com/forum/.

The whole site advocates body-part splits and it's like sticking a finger through a needle's eye trying to get through to these people and as long as I'm the only one speaking about weekly frequency, I'll never convince anyone.

Frank.S · 07-09-2006, 11:56 PM

I think it really depends on the person. Lots of people in the past have reached their goals on splits due to slower recovery time.

But yes, for the average person its not the best.

bipennate · 07-10-2006, 12:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynic

Sorry, bad wording, it's a whole other site/board: http://www.fitness.com/forum/.

The whole site advocates body-part splits and it's like sticking a finger through a needle's eye trying to get through to these people and as long as I'm the only one speaking about weekly frequency, I'll never convince anyone.

What kind of screwy board is that? :p

Ok...so which thread? I'll back you

EdChap · 07-10-2006, 01:47 AM

That's a horrible, horrible board, does it have Excellence or the Grim Reaper to compensate? If only...

Cynic · 07-10-2006, 04:42 AM

http://www.fitness.com/forum/showthread.php?t=14962

That's good Bip, because I've copied and pasted your "open chain/close chain" post on their.

And yes Ed, it's for the most part bad, but not all bad. I think they are simply not understanding that they need to experiment.

bipennate · 07-10-2006, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynic

http://www.fitness.com/forum/showthread.php?t=14962

That's good Bip, because I've copied and pasted your "open chain/close chain" post on their.

You did? You mean you're trying to confuse more people?!?!

Quote:

And yes Ed, it's for the most part bad, but not all bad. I think they are simply not understanding that they need to experiment.

Done and done
http://www.fitness.com/forum/showthr...559#post102559

EdChap · 07-10-2006, 11:03 AM

Jon,

Great response! Both detailed and well explained. I just hope that guy reads over that post a couple of times to let things sink in, it was pretty complex at times.

bipennate · 07-10-2006, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EdChap

Jon,

Great response! Both detailed and well explained. I just hope that guy reads over that post a couple of times to let things sink in, it was pretty complex at times.

Thanks Ed...I was trying to get in enough detail so that he'd listen, but not too rediculous that he wouldn't understand...I probably overcomplicated it anyway, but at least I tried!

Cynic · 07-10-2006, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EdChap

Jon,

Great response! Both detailed and well explained. I just hope that guy reads over that post a couple of times to let things sink in, it was pretty complex at times.

Ed, whenever the big guns talk, I have to fire up the dictionary.

bipennate · 07-10-2006, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynic

Ed, whenever the big guns talk, I have to fire up the dictionary.

"...holy crap...ya it is a lot of info. i have to give you the benefit of the doubt kuz u sound like a frign scientist to me."

See? Throw in some big words, and you get instant credibility, even when it's all just a bunch of horseshit!

EdChap · 07-10-2006, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynic

Ed, whenever the big guns talk, I have to fire up the dictionary.

Agreed, especially when he uses words such as 'rediculous'!

Muahahahahah!

bipennate · 07-10-2006, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EdChap

Agreed, especially when he uses words such as 'rediculous'!

Muahahahahah!

Spelling was never a strong point :p